No. 18-1338
United States v. Joseph Decore Simms
Tags: 18-usc-924(c) constitutional-challenge constitutional-law crime-of-violence criminal-statute due-process federal-criminal-law firearm firearm-offense firearms hobbs-act sentencing statutory-interpretation vagueness vagueness-doctrine void-for-vagueness
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Securities Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Securities Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the subsection-specific definition of crime of violence' in 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether the subsection-specific definition of “crime of violence” in 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(3)(B), which applies only in the limited context of a federal criminal prosecution for possessing, using, or carrying a firearm in connection with acts comprising such a crime, is unconstitutionally vague. (I)
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent GRANTED.
2019-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2019-06-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-05-24
Response to petition from respondent Joseph Decore Simms filed.
2019-05-24
Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by respondent Joseph Decore Simms.
2019-04-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 24, 2019)
Attorneys
Joseph Decore Simms
Dhamian A. Blue — Blue LLP, Respondent
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Petitioner