No. 20-400
James Avery, Jr. v. United States
Tags: armed-career-criminal-act burglary-statute circuit-split criminal-procedure divisibility divisible-statute sentence-enhancement statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Immigration
HabeasCorpus Immigration
Latest Conference:
2021-01-15
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a state burglary statute is divisible for purposes of a sentence enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a state burglary statute that disjunctively lists places that may be burgled under the statute is divisible for purposes of a sentence enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. §924(e), even though the statutory list is not exclusive and does not require the jury to agree that the defendant burgled any particular listed place. @
Docket Entries
2021-01-19
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-30
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/15/2021.
2020-12-30
Reply of petitioner James Avery, Jr. filed. (Distributed)
2020-12-28
Waiver of the 14-day waiting period under 15.5 filed.
2020-12-23
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2020-11-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 23, 2020.
2020-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 23, 2020 to December 23, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-10-22
Response Requested. (Due November 23, 2020)
2020-10-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.
2020-10-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-09-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 29, 2020)
Attorneys
James Avery, Jr.
Mark Christopher Fleming — WilmerHale, Petitioner
Mark Christopher Fleming — WilmerHale, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent