|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|14-8913||5th Cir.||Jan 12, 2016||Apr 20, 2016||8-0||Kennedy||OT 2015|
Holding: Courts reviewing use of an incorrect Federal Sentencing Guidelines range cannot apply a categorical "additional evidence" rule requiring a showing that use of the incorrect range affected a defendant's sentence in cases in which a district court applied an incorrect range but sentenced the defendant within the correct range.
Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Kennedy on April 20, 2016. Justice Alito filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Thomas joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Mar 16 2015||Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 17, 2015)|
|Apr 8 2015||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 18, 2015.|
|Apr 24 2015||Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including June 18, 2015.|
|Jun 10 2015||Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.|
|Jun 11 2015||Reply of petitioner Saul Molina-Martinez filed.|
|Jun 25 2015||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 28, 2015.|
|Oct 1 2015||Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED.|
|Nov 16 2015||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Nov 16 2015||Brief of petitioner Saul Molina-Martinez filed.|
|Nov 24 2015||SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, January 12, 2016|
|Dec 4 2015||Record requested from U.S.C.A. 5th Circuit.|
|Dec 15 2015||CIRCULATED.|
|Dec 16 2015||Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 4 2016||Reply of petitioner Saul Molina-Martinez filed. (Distributed)|
|Jan 12 2016||Argued. For petitioner: Timothy Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Houston, Tex. For respondent: Scott A.C. Meisler, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 19 2016||Record from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of Texas is electronic and also received in hard copy. (1 Envelope)|
|Apr 20 2016||Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Alito, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which Thomas, J., joined.|
|May 23 2016||JUDGMENT ISSUED|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.