No. 22-7121
Christopher Barret v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 criminal-procedure de-novo-resentencing de-novo-review direct-appeal resentencing sentencing sentencing-discretion vacatur
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2023-04-21
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether district courts must conduct full de novo resentencing following vacatur of one or more counts
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether, following the vacatur of one or more counts, either pursuant to a direct appeal or a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, a district court must conduct a full de novo resentencing? 2. Whether, even if district courts are required to hold full resentencings following vacatur on direct appeal, 28 U.S.C. § 2255 nevertheless gives courts discretion to hold limited proceedings rather than full de novo’ resentencings following vacatur of a count of conviction on a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion? 2
Docket Entries
2023-04-24
Petition DENIED.
2023-04-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/21/2023.
2023-03-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-03-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 26, 2023)
Attorneys
Christopher Barret
Brendan Meyer White — White & White, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent