No. 20-5937
Rosa Enedia Pazos Cingari v. United States
Tags: administrative-law authority commentary federal-sentencing guideline-commentary inconsistency judicial-interpretation legal-authority sentencing-guidelines statutory-construction statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Immigration
Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-11-06
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether United States Sentencing Guideline Commentary which adds to a sentencing guideline is necessarily inconsistent with the guideline such that the commentary is not authoritative?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether United States Sentencing Guideline Commentary which adds to a sentencing guideline is necessarily inconsistent with the guideline such that the commentary is not authoritative? l
Docket Entries
2020-11-09
Petition DENIED.
2020-10-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/6/2020.
2020-10-15
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-10-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 6, 2020)
Attorneys
Rosa Cingari
Dane Kristofor Chase — Chase Law Florida P.A., Petitioner
Dane Kristofor Chase — Chase Law Florida P.A., Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent