No. 19-5870
Shakeem Heratio Crawford v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: career-offender civil-rights criminal-justice criminal-law criminal-procedure due-process eighth-amendment ex-post-facto first-step-act parole retroactivity sentencing sentencing-retroactivity statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2019-10-11
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the judge abuse discretion by categorically denying career offenders benefits under the First Step Act?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 4H1 Did the Jedge Abuse Wis) DiscrectON onder We SH pmendenest poe Procece cloose by Cotenorically DEN IN) OW coreer offenders © , vinen he stated {at coreec oFeaders couldnt Benerit Fon the aay tee Ack" Woot vOAS Mode Petrwacdve, Due to Ine chs OF Abe Slatole of BAI (b) CG)? o | #2 Did the Jose Abose Wiss piscretion| order the low Amendment by allovaing Career offendas ae) Dito Je 10 tha) pecan MWe Berner | OF the First See Act" Vera We ones who wert to trial soda ag WN Saif 2
Docket Entries
2019-10-15
Petition DENIED.
2019-09-26
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2019.
2019-09-18
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-08-30
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 9, 2019)
Attorneys
Shakeem Crawford
Shakeem Heratio Crawford — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent