No. 19-6828
Reginald Jerry Shaw v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review application-notes certificate-of-appealability commentary district-court-discretion ineffective-assistance legal-interpretation sentencing-guidelines strickland-standard strickland-v-washington
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Are the commentary and application notes in the Sentencing Guideline manual authoritative or left to the District Court's discretion?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Are the commentary and application notes in the Sentencing Guideline manual authoritative or left to the District Court's discretion. 2. Can the ignorance of the Sentencing Guidelines Commentary and application notes satisfy the deficient performance and prejudice prong under Strickland v. Washington or at least be debatably deficient in the context for an application of a Certificate of Appealability.
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-11-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 2, 2020)
Attorneys
Reginald Jerry Shaw
Reginald J. Shaw — Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent