Intended loss in sentencing
Donte Jamal McClellon v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Petition Pending
Awaiting an order on the petition
- What it’s about
- Donte McClellon asks the Supreme Court to review whether an older federal sentencing rule requires judges to count intended as well as actual losses.
- What's at stake
- For McClellon, the petition leaves unresolved how the older guideline applies to his sentence and whether he was entitled to file a supplemental appeal brief.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
He also asks whether the Ninth Circuit denied him due process (the right to fair procedures) by refusing a supplemental brief after discharging his appellate lawyer but keeping that lawyer’s brief; McClellon filed a review petition and asked to proceed without paying fees.
The petition concerns a pre-2024 federal sentencing guideline and the Ninth Circuit’s handling of McClellon’s appeal.
Question presented
1. Whether the relevant conduct provisions of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines direct courts to consider intended as well as actual loss under pre-2024 U.S. Sentencing Guideline § 2B1.1, regardless of whether the Guideline comment is authoritative. 2. Whether a court of appeals violates due process of law by denying a criminal defendant’s motion to file a supplemental appellate brief when the court discharges the defendant’s appellate counsel but accepts discharged counsel’s opening brief, requiring substitute counsel to advocate solely from discharged counsel’s brief.
What happens next
The Court must decide whether to hear the case. No oral argument or decision date is set.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Court Order added: Lower Court Orders/Opinions
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.