No. 18-9420

Le'Ardrus Burris v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-05-24
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-law criminal-statute divisibility divisibility-analysis felonious-assault mathis-precedent mathis-v-united-states ohio-law ohio-revised-code-2903a sixth-circuit state-v-harris statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Environmental AdministrativeLaw SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Sixth Circuit's divisibility analysis ignores this Court's decision in Mathis v. United States and Ohio Supreme Court precedent in State v. Harris that definitively confirms that Ohio Revised Code § 2903(A) states only one crime and that its two subsections are merely 'allied offenses of similar import'

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Whether the Sixth Circuit’s divisibility analysis ignores this Court’s decision in Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. __, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) and Ohio Supreme Court precedent in State v. Harris, 911 N.E.2d 882, 886 (Ohio 2009) that definitively confirms that Ohio Revised Code § 2903(A) states only one crime and that its two subsections are merely “allied offenses of similar import”. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEDINGS The names of all

Docket Entries

2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-05-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 24, 2019)
2019-04-03
Application (18A1016) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until May 20, 2019.
2019-03-25
Application (18A1016) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from April 3, 2019 to May 20, 2019, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.

Attorneys

Le’Ardrus Burris
Craig Michael SandbergMuslin & Sandberg, Petitioner
Craig Michael SandbergMuslin & Sandberg, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent