No. 21-905
Nathaniel Rimpson, III, Charles Scott, and Carl Buggs v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: 18-usc-3582c1a 18-usc-924c circuit-split criminal-law criminal-sentencing extraordinary-circumstances federal-sentencing sentence-reduction sentencing-reduction statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Securities JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-02-18
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a district court may consider the 2018 amendment to the sentences mandated by 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in determining whether a defendant has shown 'extraordinary and compelling reasons' warranting a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a district court may consider the 2018 amendment to the sentences mandated by 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in determining whether a defendant has shown “extraordinary and compelling reasons” warranting a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(@).
Docket Entries
2022-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.
2022-01-11
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2021-12-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 19, 2022)
Attorneys
Nathaniel Rimpson III, et al.
John Gleeson — Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Petitioner
John Gleeson — Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent