No. 20-5235
Michael D. Bikundi, Sr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure discovery district-court due-process federal-rule-criminal-procedure harmless-error legal-obligation material-violation prejudice prejudicial-error sanction sanctions
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a district court has an obligation to impose a meaningful sanction for a material and highly prejudicial violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether a district court has an obligation to impose a meaningful sanction for a material and highly prejudicial violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16 i
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2020-08-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-08-07
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-03-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 31, 2020)
2019-12-11
Application (19A641) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until March 2, 2020.
2019-12-06
Application (19A641) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from January 2, 2020 to March 2, 2020, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Attorneys
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent