Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Leihinahina Sullivan, Petitioner v. United States

?•

r

4

$

Supreme Court, U.S.

FILED

No.

JAN 2 1 2026

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Leihindteind Sullivan

(Your Name)

— PETITIONER

vs.

United Stetjes.

Amenco

RESPONDENT(S)

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO

4Vve United \Skdss Cflwf oL Appeals -ferHie UtnHn Cucu'rb____

(NAME OF COURT THAT LAST RULED ON MERITS OF YOUR CASE)

PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(Your Name)

Vfctoryi He Gunp PCX Med, £ ? PO £>OX S^CO

(Address)

Ad&l^n4o t CA A 2301

(City, State, Zip Code)

(Phone Number)

Que&hone>

Pvesen-led

(0 Whether -Dedendctn-f- relied on Tudne T. MioWael fe>

l£ she plod oup 4o

4 couds all -the o4t»e< counts

would be-

^orie, (a/hen 4-hey were- nob as* Defends n"F was Senje/vodJo <gt(|

charged and Uncharged conduct- which Ddendanb toeheved tV~vvat> all dc^urHed conduct- based on whaV'Jud^© T. Michd-^l Scctbvgld- said?

Appecd IXCj July aoih( 2024 , Tkanscnp^, ECFMo. izczl| p^ag/

LQ. 1^2^/

'

we^o 4hrD>t^h Vvi-Hn 4We>, ^ll o(- 4hose oVVie«<

Counts ^eks dismissed. TheyVe> ^one . Okay^

cou^t

C2-) WheHner De^encbnM' reliance- on

: JucA^je'CT. Micbael Scwbn^l'rhC' JuckjG-

Se%hn^kJ/^) eHcdewienis -Vhctk J she- pled octi- 4t? 4 counts. 4he-

o+her eh/ara^-A n«\A Urv'WirTSisd frsvdctcJ would

\NO£>

& 1& 1 ^(c\)\nthaId apply -fo he^^jirirg her inr>me<dierVe; telect==e

Ld) VVVie+her

voluntanness o-t- +4tc ple^ or ils mtelli^enl'

chdracteK hets been in-fecleol by -the •consfihxbcmA.I ewor?

Sullivan f Mvhavicr

V'€=>-

United Stectes o-P ficrv\&<ac^L)

pel<=rtecj Ccis>e=*=

pfrydeni—

C7+Vi

,

""l -* o

Ur.' Uise Mo. <2S-tq,S2_

OishnchOur|- G%se^Mo. l ^|-cr_ Oco^- TMs-4_

Opintcrns ftelovV________ _______________ ______ ■„ -

______ _

3uvVsJi CRUSTY

Consh-Lchoy^i ant* (Skdutenry P»T)MSf6Vk5 thvslved

S-federnsr,^- o,f_

______ _____________________

Bg3Soyvj> Foj^GiFCU'vtvn^ feAthffV^—_ ___________ ___

.3

3^*-5

G

Ccnclctsicry|_____

^git Indev ol- /V^pe^dices

Append^

Deaton op Mne, UmHq Ctt'CmV CourVoP Appectl^

Appsndix

^^casioya o t" 4V>e. Or<sVncA~Ciri>iid_oP vl^w^n

Append

AppavdiK

T^i^sctnpA-o^UcKivt^ Ch^teo-f-p|e^?

July Ao&i VD2A

?

K^uesJ -fc> IVcu^can Fz?r G^MjMSsicrn5»4e> Rele^^o

'^Odtftys R^ve Since Passed lA/ith klo Peply

c>4~ A-u-HnorfhsG

Dickson v. ftardus , 551 U.S. 84 Cioor)________ __ _______

L*(W v. Ccoper, 35b U.S. {5b (zotz)_________________

-

Wall v. Basnfck, 4ZF. 4tt ai4.(4filC)^

*

Const Amend X

~

----------------- ------------------------- —- x3

United States v. Weed t 318 F. etel 342

United States u.

4

Ci< Zco4)

F.3d 380

Hncln v. Vaughn, tel Eid ^0=1 CulhCtr. W\S)

4

®oykta’ v. AUtamq; 61S U.S. 238 (

________ 4

United Stectes v. Howaid; ^1 F. 2d FiS

Uender^n v. Monym, 420 U.S.

|«^s)___4

Brady u. United ‘States,

u3

‘

1410)

4

Sheltemx/. United States, 24fc> F. 2d J51-I CStfaCir. lc’iei)__4

^taiory V. Tohneon, 461- U.S. 504( Rg4d

________ _£

Opinions feelovV

Appendix A A & Opinio as. belouu7 puUisUed otb;2OZ5 u.s. App. lexis.

X^at; 2O2S LXSZZSEI, Klo.

6 Movemter

Unitel Statesof- Annentel, p^.nW- Appellee ’

V-S.

Leihite,!^ Sullivwa, Defendant-AppeiU,^.

202^)

^unsdictienn

Sullivan -tamely -Gies-Hits Petition wtihin <tOcUys oG~

o-f- the Mm+tn Carcur-h Ccitrh o-V Appeal'5* on

Noi/ember R, 202S) thi^ CourP VYiSQan^icticn'i u^der 2g U.S.C.S? jzqi.

Consfrifuhonal and Statutory

(Von stons Tnyo I veek

Const. Amend. 5J2 Due Proosss

'Statement c4 Oxs©

P- (s 6lxiomcrho that p»ose -fthny should be liberally construed.

&ickson v. Patdus} 5SI U.S.84,^4<2001). "Tn practice, Hiis

construction

allows Courts toreccgniBe claims despite. Venous formal deficiencies, eudn

meowed" labels or lack oh cited |eg<c?| authority. "Wall v. Posnick, 42-F. 4“^,

A14, 2J8<4H3 6r.2O22>.

Petitioner C&u\li van" ) relied

Judos

^,20Z| (See Append^ C, Kf Mo. tt*4,

.

A

10

July -2O-tb ,2024) {hot it Sullivan pled out to 4 counts

°

Would loe-aones, when they were- not

Sulliwxn was

charged X* Uncharged conduct which SulUwm W*«red ife

guided conduct hosed on wbed Tud^

TulV 2°'

2024 C Appendiy. Cj EOF Ho. I2-4p4, Pct^e-t^>S24s>).

0 THE court t - - we ao thnouoh with this, <*11 ot those, other

Counts

'Sullivcun believed Jud^e 'Ssctbh^ht to t»ke a. pleu thevtshe would b©-

^ic^uitled ob«|| charged «nd uncharged conduct, Which is hot whc»t

happened , Sullivo-n wets sentenced to ^<l| c-hatged «nd unchanged conduct.

Sullivan

believed Jud^e 'Seabtight to take the pleta- (See latterv, Cooper,

55b U.S. (SbjlSZS.Ct 12,14,, 1S2_ L ed 2d aFlsCzOi^explainin^ 4k«t

this is the only remedy in cases which "the sole advan^z^je a

defendant- would have received under a plea is a lesser sen-lence/ J

Cemphasis added)).

under -the United 5>lulcs Constituhonal Amendment 3ZT f Sulliugxns Due

Fhcess P-b|hte» were riolafed when 'Jacbje Se^bigld-wnde SulhWn a ptomise

*h deleted "b> Sccuns Oi ple<a on behalt ct Goremment,1 Append lie. T> is

otter examples ot Tudy Gsctbrbjht assfshri^/he^lpin^ Plaintiff- -Governmerrt".

V4erC// ei^ni+icccnp- ehdence -ttetb Rte'+icrnte reh eci ©n teteje 3stenqkte

Compete tri mahinq hsrdea&icm te> teil^e az ple^a. G AppendiyL C, Tel-Uo. 12341 Ffod01

10 1332-3). ScHlivezn had adczte Ire!icnce toy tee premises mad& by teic^ coixte'.cb

F.3d 34-4, 35o(4-to Cir. 2Oo4'Cre<x>r^ receded AtetP 4Vie

United Sfatesr Wood,

Coates evroneoccs adte&^corredeol

by pia>&eoute>r/ " Co ndtteted 4 sub^teirrhal

^d

■factor Tdctencteri-I4>l dedsicte te ple<=id ^u.iHy ^United <Ste4es r- Amciy<u}

S’SG] 3S3 Qs^-Cir. hA^Xdetendcrnt'sqnc? (cd his reliance cxn judqes. oidvice by

Sesterhj -fo reteute hie plea. once tee diste'eb c<yuH- dchnoiA/ledq^

emxr

in ctdi/istn^ Mendate thte it- Could mteq euaspemte downward dep«rh-ue>

*n sen+ericunq)’ Finte v, tetyghn , GFf-F. 3d ^03^13 £((tkl £(P

■Scu^H- terteer assuiwice^ ttem tee Stete courp -teeth hrs counsels a.drtc&

he

r^rdinq

possible- sonfencte.vyc<s connate before p(e«d^ ^ui Hy>

PetehcrneMr c©rtends tecte her ^uildy piece was

ct/id v'ctertezrily’ ( ere

&\ 5.Ob.

requiredf see- toykte \Z- Alcthamea ,

knowingly

U.S. Z3?; 2.42-44^

because <tee. Iccdced ci -fu.|( undexstendvr^

ITock ; 23 L. ed. 2d <25f-4-C

Op tee pies? and

nop ofexed

14s consequences , see Id. g?-p 3.43te4;

a resultc4 tee-

^(sirnpiresston orecded

by tee djste’cteccrur-p. tee \/o|uritennes. op<?t

^jU( (iy ptea is c>\

o4~ teiv teeth CJTUcps rewed de Kioi/a. (United Stetes

1 ■ hotA/czvd , d^l F. 2d

l^XCd-HiQP. W^)-

"teereis no diepu-te tete tee-re W(XS a

mis representerte>4 made do

Scvllirisen a4~ h&r re-zarreti^^ me/te""tee only peteirente quespon tswlaetecar

tee/ voluntemness obtee- ple^ or ite inteU^qerte character' hets been

lofecp&d

by tee constitetetei^ ervenr.'' United, ‘dtec.s ez. ref. He:;t|ey..y-.

(tetnnon, 3S3> F, 2d lOSi, ic®TOr.

s-e&^leo

Morggzia , 423 U-3.

| b44--4S; clU’3.Ci-. 2253 , 225T , 4d L.(rd -2d. IOSC.

A sltectete ib white a defendan-p vs induced tey deception ( cun

antel-fi lied p/Drv>i&<s

vo |u ntei n ness> ex te oulczted by teer

pleci mvdurrte^y. A plea cte q <x i (fy

ie diredp Con&squenco-S, incTudincr

tee actexl i/alue

( R^hqiiohm te&Lten v. United

_ '

______ \ /

'“-A

________ \

•.,

,Z i

..

_

_ 1

tete F. 2d c,zfij s;q.z ^ 2. (Q^

? t. 6d. 2d

kidded). 5ee -also Mdo^y^. -Jhhn^caq;

zkd- U.S. SO4, SO^^lOj IC4S.O-. 2^3; 254Tt 25<^ §' L.6d . 2d 4-3T-

( HS4-)Cexplaii^ivT^ -Fhaf- wV\er& ple^ no-(- produc-t c£ " ^Oi^emmenVctl

dec_ep4iori "or ’’ixn-ftitfilled pvomise f v'oluridetuqneSS txirid irrhdli^eHCe/

re^uihsmsnfe .^disfed oind noh^ -fUal- uvhet^ ddendo^ple^ds

^Uilly om d dd&S' prci-mtsOj ''ocm^Ghcni ^nno-F dci^id}.

piece on whci-H JUd^e^•S^biAcjld"

P>asad onfoe aferemen-hovied Sullivan is

iViUdva*/ her pk^ and \a& assigned a

"IW <s(n

-fwil Tudgo.

pQ^lasian

Sulliv'^ui ask. 44<vd’ he*' Wn-l-ol- Certiorari b^^Fztnfe4 «nd sulomife

Pc*1‘tayi on -Hits da^} Sanuarx] ||?T

2OZ&.

Adelan+o; C4,