No. 19-7681
Howard Aron Washington, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: advisory-guidelines appellate-review criminal-sentencing gall-v-new-jersey guideline-departure procedural-error procedural-reasonableness reasonableness rosales-mireles Rosales-Mireles-v-United-States sentencing sentencing-guidelines standard-of-review
Key Terms:
Privacy
Privacy
Latest Conference:
2020-03-20
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's methodology in imposing a substantial guideline departure was inconsistent with this Court's decision in Gall v. New Jersey
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED THE DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT IN UNITED STATES V. WASHINGTON IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS COURT’S DECISION IN GALL V. NEW JERSEY, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), IN THAT THE DISTRICT COURT USED AN IMPERMISSIBLE METHODOLOGY TO UPWARDLY DEPART AND FAILED TO OFFER ANY REASONS WHY THE OFFENSE LEVEL SELCTED WAS APPROPRIATE. LIKEWISE, THE DECISION IS INCONSISTENT WITH THIS COURTS REASONING AND DECISION IN ROSALES-MIRELES V. UNITED STATES, 138 S. CT. 1897, 1902 (2018)
Docket Entries
2020-03-23
Petition DENIED.
2020-03-05
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2020.
2020-02-26
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-02-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 19, 2020)
Attorneys
Howard Washington, Jr.
Mitchell Glenn Styers — Banzet, Thompson & Styers, PLLC, Petitioner
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent