No. 18-9763
Stirling Michael Heaton v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: concurrent-sentences concurrent-sentencing criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing discretion federal-guidelines federal-jurisdiction federal-plea-agreement judicial-discretion modification retroactive-amendment retroactive-guidelines-amendment sentence-concurrency sentencing-guidelines sentencing-modification sentencing-reform-act
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a sentencing court has discretion to adjust a federal sentence to achieve concurrency with another criminal sentence in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED (1). In § 3582(c)(2) proceedings to modify a federal sentence in light of a retroactive amendment to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, does the sentencing court have discretion to adjust to the modified federal sentence in order to achieve concurrency with another criminal sentence? : 1
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-06-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 24, 2019)
Attorneys
Stirling Heaton
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent