Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Samuel Elliott v. United States
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 25-2018 · judgment November 13, 2025
Question presented
QU ESTION PRESENTED FOR RE VIEW Petitionersoughtreliefunder28U.S.C.§ 2255ongroundsofineffective assistance arising from errors and omissions by counsel pertaining to both custody and a restitution amount of $730,000.00. The courts below denied the restitution-related claim on grounds that relief under § 2255 is not available for ineffective assistance related to restitution. Would reasonable jurists find the denial of Petitioner’s ineffective assistance claim on these grounds debatable or wrong? 2
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Scott M. Davidson
Scott M. Davidson, Ph.D., Esq., LLC
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Mar 23 2026Petition DENIED.
- Feb 26 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/20/2026.
- Feb 20 2026Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Feb 11 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 19, 2026)