No. 24-5615
Tags: 28-usc-2255 circuit-split criminal-judgment federal-procedure limitations-period restitution-obligations
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2025-02-21
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the one-year limitations period in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f) runs from the date of the original or amended criminal judgment when restitution obligations are specified
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Where a criminal judgment is amended to impose restitution obligations that were generically imposed but left undetermined in the original judgment, does the one-year limitations period in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(f) run from the date of the amended judgment, as the Second and Tenth Circuits have held, or the date of the original judgment, as the Ninth Circuit alone has concluded? i
Docket Entries
2025-02-24
Petition DENIED.
2025-01-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/21/2025.
2025-01-21
Reply of Merl Simpson submitted.
2025-01-21
Reply of petitioner Merl Simpson filed.
2025-01-08
Brief of United States in opposition submitted.
2025-01-08
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2024-12-03
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including January 6, 2025.
2024-12-02
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 6, 2024 to January 6, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-10-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 6, 2024.
2024-10-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 6, 2024 to December 6, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-10-07
Response Requested. (Due November 6, 2024)
2024-10-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/18/2024.
2024-09-27
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-09-18
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 23, 2024)
Attorneys
Merl Simpson
E. Joshua Rosenkranz — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Petitioner
Elizabeth Richardson-Royer — Richardson-Royer Law, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Sarah M. Harris — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent