No. 22-5435
Rahsaan Johnson v. United States
Tags: concepcion-precedent concepcion-v-united-states district-court-denial district-court-discretion first-step-act judicial-review mitigating-information post-sentencing-conduct sentencing-mitigation vacatur
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2022-12-02
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the district court's denial of Mr. Johnson's First Step Act motion must be vacated in light of Concepcion v. United States
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the district court’s denial of Mr. Johnson’s First Step Act motion must be vacated in light of Concepcion v. United States because the court did not consider— or, at the very least, failed to demonstrate it considered—any of the new, mitigating information presented in Mr. Johnson’s motion, including his post-sentencing conduct. ii
Docket Entries
2023-01-06
Judgment issued.
2022-12-05
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Concepcion</i> v. <i>United States</i>, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
2022-11-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/2/2022.
2022-10-24
Memorandum of respondent United States filed.
2022-09-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 24, 2022.
2022-09-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 22, 2022 to October 24, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-08-19
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 22, 2022)
Attorneys
Rahsaan Johnson
Samantha Jean Kuhn — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Samantha Jean Kuhn — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent