Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Luis Daniel Fuentes v. United States

IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 24-11906 · judgment September 11, 2025


Certiorari denied · January 20, 2026

Question presented

Title 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) requires a court, at the time of sentencing, to “state in open court the reasons for its imposition of the particular sentence.” This Court has previously limited this statute’s mandate and stated that a sentencing court need not issue a full explanation of its reasoning – explaining a court need not write “full opinion” in every case to explain its reasoning. Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 356-9 (2007). However, the Fifth Amendment guarantees defendants the right to Due Process, including on appeal. But without a complete record on appeal, a defendant cannot argue that a sentencing court failed to properly weigh the factors set forth in § 3553(a), resulting in an unreasonable sentence. The question presented is: Whether a sentencing court must address mitigating evidence and arguments offered by defense counsel regarding factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) when stating its reasons for its imposition of a particular sentence?

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Meghan Collins
Office of the Federal Public Defender

For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Jan 20 2026
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Dec 31 2025
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/16/2026.
  3. Dec 22 2025
    Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
  4. Dec 10 2025
    Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 14, 2026)