No. 22-6627

Kenneth Mobley v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-01-26
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure district-court-jurisdiction due-process jurisdiction loss-calculation restitution restitution-order sentencing-guidelines sentencing-reasonableness substantive-reasonableness
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2023-02-17
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Was Mr. Mobley's sentence procedurally and substantively unreasonable

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Question I Presented is: Was Mr. Mobley’s sentence procedurally and substantively unreasonable as it was calculated on an excessive amount of loss unjustified by the facts of the case due to Overcounting of the Loss Calculation, Failure to Credit Monies and Collateral Received as to Reduce the Loss and Calculation, and Overcounting of Losses for Offenses not Cognizable in this Action? Question II Presented is: Was The Restitution Order Supported By Facts in the Record as it was incorrect as to the amounts and individuals awarded restitution and in excess of the District Court’s jurisdiction? 2 LIST OF ALL

Docket Entries

2023-02-21
Petition DENIED.
2023-02-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/17/2023.
2023-01-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-01-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 27, 2023)

Attorneys

Kenneth Mobley
Michael Martin LosavioMichael Losavio, Attorney at Law, Petitioner
Michael Martin LosavioMichael Losavio, Attorney at Law, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent