No. 18-8584
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: conspiracy constitutional-challenge criminal-conspiracy criminal-law criminal-procedure drug-statute due-process federal-indictment federal-jurisdiction mens-rea statutory-interpretation statutory-vagueness title-21-usc-846 vagueness
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess FifthAmendment
Latest Conference:
2019-04-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is Title 21 U.S.C. §846 ATTEMPT AND CONSPIRACY UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE BECAUSE IT FAILS TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED ESSENTIAL ELEMENT THAT THE DEFENDANT 'KNOWINGLY' AGREED AND CONSPIRED?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED... tt a . i. Count 1 Conspiracy Indictment is insufficient on. ; its face because it omitted essential element(s) re that’ the Government had to prove. ~ , oo 7 (a). Is Title 21 U.S.C. §846 ATTEMPT AND CONSPIRACY ._ Lo UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE BECAUSE IT FAILS TO) . : -» PROVIDE THE REQUIRED ESSENTIAL ELEMENT THAT THE ° . DEFENDANT "KNOWINGLY" AGREED AND CONSPIRED ? / (b) «IS TITLE.21 U.S.C. §846 UNCONSTITUTIONALLY VAGUE ss AS APPLIED IN THE INSTANT CASE 2? oo . ae
Docket Entries
2019-04-29
Petition DENIED.
2019-04-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/26/2019.
2019-04-02
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-03-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 26, 2019)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent