No. 22-5394
Eric Christopher Falkowski v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: controlled-substance-act controlled-substances criminal-law due-process enhancement-clause overbreadth sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation vagueness void-for-vagueness
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-10-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether USSG § 1B1.1's enhancement clause is impermissibly overbroad or void for vagueness
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
question presented on certiorari.) 2. Whether the equitable tolling doctrine—as applicable to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”)—is a dead letter of caselaw? 3. Whether, under Sup. Ct. 12.4 and 13.3, a petitioner’s ability to join in a codefendant’s petition for certiorari to the United Supreme Court alters the AEDPA’s one-year limitations period? (See, e.g., Kemp v. United States, (No. 21-5726) 142 S. Ct. 752, 211 L. Ed. 2d 471, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 81, 90 U.S.L.W. 3206 (U.S., June 13, 2022)) i
Docket Entries
2022-10-11
Petition DENIED.
2022-09-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/7/2022.
2022-09-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-08-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 19, 2022)
Attorneys
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent