No. 19-7622
Samuel Elliott v. United States
Tags: 8th-amendment appellate-review child-pornography criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing due-process federal-guidelines sentencing sentencing-guidelines substantive-reasonableness substantive-unreasonableness
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-03-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a sentence imposed pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guidelines covering child pornography offenses, U.S.S.G. §§ 2G2.1 and 2G2.2, is substantively unreasonable due to flaws in those guidelines?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a sentence imposed pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guidelines covering child pornography offenses, U.S.S.G. §§ 2G2.1 and 2G2.2, is substantively unreasonable due to flaws in those guidelines? i
Docket Entries
2020-03-09
Petition DENIED.
2020-02-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/6/2020.
2020-02-18
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-02-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 11, 2020)
2019-12-06
Application (19A619) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until February 6, 2020.
2019-11-27
Application (19A619) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 8, 2019 to February 6, 2020, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
Attorneys
Samuel Elliott
John Carl Arceci — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent