No. 18-9781
Adam J. Winarske v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 acca-enhancement armed-career-criminal-act circuit-split criminal-procedure due-process johnson-decision johnson-v-united-states preponderance-of-the-evidence preponderance-standard residual-clause section-2255 statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2255 requires a Johnson petitioner to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the residual clause provided the basis for his Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) enhancement?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), whether 28 U.S.C. § 2255 requires a Johnson petitioner to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the residual clause provided the basis for his Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) enhancement? i
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-07-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-07-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-06-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 25, 2019)
Attorneys
Adam Winarske
Jason Tupman — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent