No. 19-6378
Raymond Gentile v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 21-usc-841 21-usc-846 criminal-justice-system due-process equal-protection federal-statute geographic-classification geographic-disparity geographic-location marijuana-legalization marijuana-offenses prima-facie prima-facie-claim prosecutorial-discretion selective-prosecution
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2019-11-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is geographic location an arbitrary classification in the application of prosecutorial decisions for marijuana-related offenses under 21 U.S.C §§ 841 and 846?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Is geographic location an arbitrary classification in the application of prosecutorial decisions for marijuana-related offenses under 21 U.S.C §§ 841 and 846? What evidence is sufficient to establish a prima facie showing that geographic location, rather than other factors, was the reason for the prosecution of petitioner sufficient to entitle petitioner to additional discovery on his selective prosecution claim? i
Docket Entries
2019-11-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2019.
2019-11-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-10-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 25, 2019)
Attorneys
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent