No. 20-6435
Christopher Jones v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: aggregate-sentencing constitutional-law criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing due-process federal-appeals federal-courts judicial-precedent north-carolina-pearce north-carolina-v-pearce sentencing-doctrine
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-01-08
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the aggregate sentencing doctrine violates the rule in North Carolina v. Pearce
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the aggregate sentencing doctrine adopted by various Federal Courts of Appeal violates the rule set forth in North Carolina y. Pearce?
Docket Entries
2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-16
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-11-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 28, 2020)
Attorneys
Christopher Jones
Richard B. Kuniansky — Suite 1400, Petitioner
Richard B. Kuniansky — Suite 1400, Petitioner
United States of America
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent