No. 23-6387
Montgomery Lebeau v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: anticipated-imprisonment concurrent-sentence concurrent-sentences criminal-procedure federal-sentencing judicial-interpretation same-incident sentencing-guidelines state-charges ussg-5g1.3(c)
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2024-02-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a pending state charge arising out of the same incident as the federal case plainly qualifies as 'anticipated' under USSG § 5G1.3(c)?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED When a state term of imprisonment is anticipated to result from another offense that is relevant conduct to the federal offense of conviction, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide that a defendant’s federal sentence “shall be imposed to run concurrently to the anticipated term of imprisonment” under USSG § 5G1.3(c). The question presented is: Whether a pending state charge arising out of the same incident as the federal case plainly qualifies as “anticipated” under USSG § 5G1.3(c)? i
Docket Entries
2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-26
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2023-12-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 29, 2024)
Attorneys
Montgomery Lebeau
Rachael Steenholdt — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Rachael Steenholdt — Federal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent