Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) applies to the imposition of criminal restitution
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) applies to the imposition of criminal restitution, as suggested in Hester v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 509 (2019) (Gorsuch, J., dissenting from denial of certiorari). 2. Whether a “deliberate avoidance” mental state is sufficient for a conspiracy offense. i STATEMENT OF RELATED CASES ¢ United States v. Rodrigo Pablo Lozano, No. 13CR00675-PSG, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Judgment entered April 12, 2017. * United States v. Rodrigo Pablo Lozano, No. 17-50127, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Judgment entered April 29, 2019, rehearing denied June 14, 2019. i
2020-01-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2020.
2020-01-27
Reply of petitioner Rodrigo Lozano filed.
2020-01-15
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-12-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 15, 2020.
2019-12-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 16, 2019 to January 15, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-11-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 16, 2019.
2019-11-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 14, 2019 to December 16, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-15
Response Requested. (Due November 14, 2019)
2019-10-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/1/2019.
2019-10-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-09-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 17, 2019)