Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Paul Engstrom v. United States
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 24-1878 · judgment February 5, 2026
Questions presented
-
In Bouie v. City of Columbia, 378 U.S. 347 (1964), this Court recognized a right of fair warning against an unforeseeable and retroactive judicial expansion of a criminal statute. Is that right limited exclusively to cases concerning the scope of criminal liability, or does it include cases involving the calculation of a defendant’s sentence?
-
In Olano v. United States, 507 U.S. 725 (1993), this Court set out the four prongs of analysis for plain-error review. Where a district court’s error results in a sentence that the court would not have otherwise imposed, may the appellate court find plain-error review satisfied without considering Olano’s fourth prong?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Houston Goddard
Goddard Pope PLLC
For respondent
D. John Sauer
Solicitor General
Case
Subject area
Criminal Procedure (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Order
Order list, October 5, 2026 · Certiorari denied
Proceedings
- Oct 05 2026Petition DENIED.
- Aug 13 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2026.
- Aug 11 2026Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Jul 17 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 21, 2026)