No. 20-7715

In Re Richard DeCaro

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2021-04-12
Status: Dismissed
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP
Tags: double-jeopardy ex-post-facto federal-statute first-degree-murder ineffective-assistance ineffective-assistance-of-counsel mandatory-life second-degree-murder sentencing-guidelines sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
FifthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2021-06-10 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Ex Post Facto Clause is violated

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Ex Post Facto Clause is violated where petitioner was sentenced to the amended statute, first degree murder, mandatory life, rather than the statute in effect at the time of the alleged offense, second degree murder, any term of years or for life; where this Court said the Guideline : range is 168-210 months, leaving petitioner's legal sentence terminated? 2. Whether petitioner's sentence of first degree murder violates the ; Double Jeopardy Clause where the federal statute requires a “violation of the laws of any state” as an element of the offense; causing the federal jury to re-adjudicate the identical state law petitioner was found not guilty of violating by the state jury? 3. Whether counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel, guaranteed : by the Sixth Amendment, for not ensuring petitioner was constitutionally © sentenced? i Fo Bn yee 7 N :

Docket Entries

2021-06-14
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2021-05-25
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/10/2021.
2021-05-18
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2021-05-03
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2021-04-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.
2021-01-28
Petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed.

Attorneys

Richard DeCaro
Richard DeCaro — Petitioner
Richard DeCaro — Petitioner