No. 23-7746

Robert Brumfield, III v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2024-06-18
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: acquitted-conduct brady-prejudice criminal-procedure due-process fifth-amendment jury-acquittal prosecution-evidence sentencing sentencing-guidelines sixth-amendment
Key Terms:
DueProcess FifthAmendment
Latest Conference: 2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether courts evaluating Brady prejudice are permitted to ignore a jury's acquittal when evaluating the strength of the prosecution's evidence

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether courts evaluating Brady prejudice are permitted to ignore a jury’s acquittal when evaluating the strength of the prosecution’s evidence. IL. Whether courts must consider all of the evidence—the good and the bad—when evaluating Brady prejudice. Il. Whether the case should be remanded, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2106, for the limited purpose of giving the lower court an opportunity to resentence Mr. Brumfield in light of a recently adopted Guidelines amendment that would result in a lower Guideline range. IV. | Whether the Fifth and Sixth Amendments prohibit a federal court from basing a criminal defendant’s sentence on conduct for which a jury has acquitted the defendant. i

Docket Entries

2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-06-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-06-25
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2024-06-25
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-06-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 18, 2024)
2024-05-07
Application (23A983) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until June 19, 2024.
2024-04-29
Application (23A983) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 20, 2024 to July 19, 2024, submitted to Justice Alito.

Attorneys

Robert Brumfield III
David Aaron NovodLaw Office of D. Aaron Novod, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent