No. 23-7844
Marcus Orlando Armstrong v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure district-court district-court-jurisdiction forfeiture forfeiture-doctrine judicial-discretion objection sentencing sentencing-procedure standard-of-review
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity JusticiabilityDoctri
SocialSecurity JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does a defendant forfeit a challenge to the manner in which the district court imposed sentence by failing to object after the sentence is pronounced, even though the district court does not invite additional objections after it announces the sentence and before it concludes the sentencing-hearing?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Does a defendant forfeit a challenge to the manner in which the district court imposed sentence by failing to object after the sentence is pronounced, even though the district court does not invite additional objections after it announces the sentence and before it concludes the sentencing hearing? -ii
Docket Entries
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-09
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2024-07-09
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-06-27
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 1, 2024)
Attorneys
Marcus Armstrong
Marisa Conroy — Law Office of Marisa L. D. Conroy, Petitioner
Marisa Conroy — Law Office of Marisa L. D. Conroy, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent