No. 20-8369
Clarence Clark v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 2nd-amendment constitutional-challenge constitutional-law criminal-procedure due-process fifth-amendment guilty-plea plain-error plea-bargaining sentencing sixth-amendment statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2021-09-27
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Second Circuit Court of Appeals erred in violation of U.S. Const. V and VI as well as this Court's precedent
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, erred in violation of U.S. Const. V and VI as well as this Court’s precedent, when it denied Mr. Clark’s constitutional challenges to his guilty plea to a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) and departed from the sound reasoning of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in United States v. Gary which found a similar error per se harmful requiring vacatur? il
Docket Entries
2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-07-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-06-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-06-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 21, 2021)
Attorneys
Clarence Clark
Michelle Barth — Law Office of Michelle Anderson Barth, Petitioner
Michelle Barth — Law Office of Michelle Anderson Barth, Petitioner
United States
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent