No. 20-6180
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-3553 court-of-appeals criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing district-court federal-sentencing procedural-reasonableness procedural-unreasonableness sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation supreme-court
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-12-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in rejecting Reyes's contention that the sentence was procedurally unreasonable based on the district court's failure to comply with 18 USC § 3553(a)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
ISSUES PRESENTED I. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in rejecting Reyes’s contention that the . sentence was procedurally unreasonable based on the district court’s failure to comply with 18 USC § 3553(a)? ; II. | Whether the Court of Appeals erred in rejecting Reyes’s contention that the | sentence was procedurally unreasonable based on the district court’s failure | to comply with 18 USC § 3553(c)? “ | | . : | | ; | |
Docket Entries
2020-12-07
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-11-06
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-10-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 2, 2020)
Attorneys
Naquan Reyes
Andrew H. Freifeld — Andrew Freifeld, Esq., Petitioner
Andrew H. Freifeld — Andrew Freifeld, Esq., Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent