No. 23-6799
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure criminal-sentencing due-process federal-sentencing judicial-discretion legal-reasoning sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2024-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) requires a sentencing court which rejects a defendant's nonfrivilous arguments in favor of a lower sentence to explain its reasons for doing so?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) requires a sentencing court which rejects a defendant’s nonfrivilous arguments in favor of a lower sentence to explain its reasons for doing so? |
Docket Entries
2024-03-18
Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition. See 28 U. S. C. §455(b)(3) and Code of Conduct for Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, Canon 3B(2)(e) (prior government employment).
2024-02-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2024.
2024-02-26
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2024-02-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 22, 2024)
Attorneys
Leon King
Dane Kristofor Chase — Chase Law Florida P.A., Petitioner
Dane Kristofor Chase — Chase Law Florida P.A., Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent