No. 20-7408
Trystan Keun Napper v. United States
Tags: appellate-review circuit-split criminal-procedure federal-courts judicial-discretion legal-interpretation plain-error standard-of-review statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
DueProcess HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-04-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) permits courts of appeals to grant appellate relief in the absence of error shown by binding precedent, or whether it is instead sufficient to show that the district court plainly erred in light of the clear text of a Rule, Guideline, or statute?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b) permits courts of appeals to grant appellate relief in the absence of error shown by binding precedent, or whether it is instead sufficient to show that the district court plainly erred in light of the clear text of a Rule, Guideline, or statute? ii
Docket Entries
2021-04-19
Petition DENIED.
2021-03-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/16/2021.
2021-03-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-03-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 12, 2021)
Attorneys
Trystan Keun Napper
Kevin Joel Page — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Kevin Joel Page — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent