No. 20-5533

Gayle McNamara v. United States

Lower Court: First Circuit
Docketed: 2020-08-27
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appeal appellate-review criminal-history district-court-error downward-variance judicial-discretion offense-level sentencing-guidelines standard-of-review
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2020-10-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Should the petitioner's appeal be reinstated?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED A defendant who has shown that the district court mistakenly deemed applicable an incorrect, higher Guidelines range has demonstrated a reasonable probability of a different outcome. Here, the district court mistakenly classified the petitioner in a higher criminal history category than he should have, and mistakenly concluded that an offense level enhancement was appropriate. Nonetheless, the court of appeals found that the “downward-variant sentence ultimately imposed was ‘untether[ed]’ from any error as to criminal history category, to the extent any such error occurred,” and made no finding at all as to the offense level enhancement. Therefore, the court of appeals dismissed petitioner’s appeal. Should the petitioner’s appeal be reinstated? ey)

Docket Entries

2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-08-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 28, 2020)

Attorneys

Gayle McNamara
James Bennett KrasnooKrasnoo, Klehm & Falkner LLP, Petitioner
James Bennett KrasnooKrasnoo, Klehm & Falkner LLP, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent