No. 21-6007
Carlton Potts, aka Pep v. United States
Tags: appellate-review criminal-resentencing criminal-sentencing district-court district-court-discretion factual-developments fair-sentencing-act first-step-act legal-developments sentencing-reduction statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-09-28
(distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments when deciding to impose a reduced sentence under the First Step Act
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether, when deciding if it should “impose a reduced sentence” on an eligible defendant under Section 404(b) of the First Step Act of 2018, a district court must or may consider intervening legal and factual developments. i INTERESTED PARTIES There are no
Docket Entries
2022-10-03
Petition DENIED.
2022-09-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
2022-06-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/29/2022.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-11-18
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2021-10-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 18, 2021)
Attorneys
Carlton Potts
Brenda Greenberg Bryn — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Brenda Greenberg Bryn — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent