No. 18-9460
Quentin Perry v. United States
IFP
Tags: 5th-amendment 6th-amendment armed-career-criminal-act due-process fifth-amendment jury-trial sixth-amendment statutory-interpretation vagueness
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the judicial determination of crimes 'committed on occasions different from one another' under the Armed Career Criminal Act violate the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury and the Fifth Amendment right to due process?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Does the judicial determination of crimes “committed on occasions different from one another” under the Armed Career Criminal Act violate the Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury and the Fifth Amendment right to due process? 2. Is the Armed Career Criminal Act provision regarding determination of crimes “committed on occasions different from one another” void for vagueness? I
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-08-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-26
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2019-06-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including July 29, 2019.
2019-06-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from June 28, 2019 to July 29, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-05-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 28, 2019)
Attorneys
Quentin Perry
Rachel K. Paulose — University of St. Thomas School of Law, Petitioner
Rachel K. Paulose — University of St. Thomas School of Law, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent