|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|17-5684||11th Cir.||N/A||N/A||N/A||N/A||OT 2017|
Issues: (1) Whether the petitioner’s mandatory guidelines sentence, which was enhanced under the residual clause of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, is unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, and, if so, whether a conviction for burglary of a dwelling under Florida law qualifies as a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2’s elements clause; and (2) whether published orders issued by a circuit court of appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3), and in the context of applications to file second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motions, constitute binding precedent outside of that context.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Aug 17 2017||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 21, 2017)|
|Aug 29 2017||Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.|
|Sep 07 2017||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/25/2017.|
|Sep 20 2017||Response Requested. (Due October 20, 2017)|
|Oct 12 2017||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including November 20, 2017.|
|Nov 20 2017||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Dec 27 2017||Reply of petitioner Gregory Eugene Allen filed.|
|Jan 11 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2018.|
|Feb 20 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/23/2018.|
|Feb 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/2/2018.|
|Mar 12 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/16/2018.|
|Mar 19 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/23/2018.|
|Mar 26 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/29/2018.|
|Apr 09 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.|
|Apr 16 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/20/2018.|
|Apr 23 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/27/2018.|
|Apr 26 2018||Letter of April 26, 2018, from the Solicitor General received. (Distributed)|
|Apr 27 2018||Letter of April 27, 2018, form counsel for petitioner received. (Distributed)|
|Apr 27 2018||Letter of April 27, 2018, from the Solicitor General received. (Distributed) (This letter is a corrected version of the Solicitor General's letter of April 26, 2018)|
|May 07 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/10/2018.|
|May 14 2018||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/17/2018.|
|May 21 2018||Petition DENIED.|
Today at SCOTUS: One oral argument on the statute of limitations in the Quiet Title Act. Is it "jurisdictional"? Or just a "claim-processing rule"? That might sound arcane, but cases like these affect the ability of citizens to sue the federal government.
A squabble over a forest road may pave the way for further narrowing of “jurisdictional” timing rules - SCOTUSblog
Wednesday’s argument in Wilkins v. United States is next in a protracted line of cases in which the court ...
Bribery or lobbying?
Percoco v. United States in a TikTok minute.
JUST IN: For the second time in the past week, SCOTUS denies an emergency request to block the execution of Kevin Johnson. The execution is scheduled for tonight in Missouri. Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissent from the brief order allowing the execution to proceed.
Today at SCOTUS: Can the federal government prioritize certain groups of unauthorized immigrants for deportation over others? And do states have standing to sue the government if they disagree with those priorities? @AHoweBlogger previews U.S. v. Texas:
In U.S. v. Texas, broad questions over immigration enforcement and states’ ability to challenge federal policies - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court will hear oral argument on Tuesday in a dispute over the Biden administration’s authority to...
Today at SCOTUS: The justices return to the bench for oral arguments in a pair of public-corruption cases, both stemming from scandals in New York politics that arose during Andrew Cuomo's time as governor. In both cases, the defendants are claiming prosecutorial overreach.