No. 23-6134
Rajon Jamison v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: armed-career-criminal-act armed-career-offender base-level base-level-calculation constitutional-rights criminal-procedure due-process juvenile-conviction sentencing-error sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess Securities
DueProcess Securities
Latest Conference:
2024-01-05
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the trial court erred in applying a 26-point base level instead of the appropriate 24-point base level, and in sentencing the petitioner under the Armed Career Offender Statute based on a conviction from when the petitioner was 13 years old
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
ISSUE PRESENTED I. WHETHER THIS COURT SHOULD GRANT THIS APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI AND ADDRESS TWO SENTENCING ERROR OF SIGNIFICANCE WHEN THE TRIAL COURT ERRED WHEN IT APPLIED A 26POINT BASE LEVEL INSTEAD OF THE APPROPRIATE SENTENCING BASE LEVEL SHOULD HAVE BEEN 24 AND WHEN THE TRIAL COURT ERRONEOUSLY SENTENCED THE PURSUANT TO THE ARMED CAREER OFFENDER STATUTE BASED ON A CONVICTION ALMOST 30 YEARS AGO WHEN THE WAS MERELY 13 YEARS OLD?
Docket Entries
2024-01-08
Petition DENIED.
2023-12-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/5/2024.
2023-12-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2023-11-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 29, 2023)
Attorneys
Rajon Jamison
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent