No. 21-5634
Michael D. Forbes v. United States
Tags: appellate-review criminal-resentencing criminal-sentencing first-step-act guideline-range reasonableness-standard section-404 sentencing-guidelines sentencing-review
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should the reasonableness standard apply on appellate review of a ruling on a motion under Section 404 of the First Step Act?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Appellate courts review criminal sentences for reasonableness. And major variances or departures from the advisory guideline range must be supported by a more significant justification than a minor one. As a result of the First Step Act of 2018, Petitioner’s original sentence is now well above the guideline range. Should the reasonableness standard apply on appellate review of a ruling on a motion under Section 404 of the First Step Act? i
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-11-22
Reply of petitioner Michael Forbes filed.
2021-11-12
Memorandum of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2021-10-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 12, 2021. See Rule 30.1
2021-10-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 12, 2021 to November 11, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 12, 2021)
Attorneys
Michael Forbes
Frederick William Ulrich — Federal Public Defenders Office, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent