No. 25-5342
Raymond Arthur Verrill v. United States
Tags: appellate-review criminal-procedure judicial-discretion plain-error sentencing-guidelines sentencing-standard
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2025-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether appellate courts should accept sentencing judges' routine assertions that they would have imposed the same sentence despite Sentencing Guidelines errors
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Some sentencing judges routinely assert that they would have selected the exact same sentence regardless of any error in applying the Sentencing Guidelines. Should an appellate court take those routine assertions at value ? ii DIRECTLY
Docket Entries
2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-08-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-08-21
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-08-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 12, 2025)
Attorneys
United States
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent