No. 23-6707
Sean Robert Wathen v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-procedure dangerous-weapon district-court drug-offense enhancement factual-findings findings-of-fact sentencing sentencing-discretion sentencing-guidelines u.s.s.g-2d1.1(b)(1) weapon-enhancement
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2024-03-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is the sentencing court required to make specific findings of fact, supported by the record, that a defendant possessed a dangerous weapon in connection with the offense of conviction, before applying a two-level enhancement under U.S.S. G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), and did the district court do so in this case?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. Is the sentencing court required to make specific findings of fact, supported by the record, that a defendant possessed a dangerous weapon in connection with the offense of conviction, before applying a two-level enhancement under U.S.S. G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), and did the district court do so in this case? i
Docket Entries
2024-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2024-02-15
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2024.
2024-02-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-02-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 11, 2024)
Attorneys
Sean Robert Wathen
Katherine Ball — Katie Ball PLLC, Petitioner
Katherine Ball — Katie Ball PLLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent