Does the Constitution require that the accused know the elements of a crime in order to validly plead guilty?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Question One This Court found that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) requires an elevated degree of intent for every non-jurisdictional element of the crime. Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019). On the eve of trial, Mr. Golden pleaded guilty, if he had known the true nature of the § ¥922(g) mens rea, then he would not have pleaded guilty. Does the Constitution require that the accused know the , elements of a crime in order to validly plead guilty? Question Two When determining whether a prior conviction qualifies as a career-offender predicate, this Court holds the Constitution tolerates an abbreviated fact finding procedure: the categorical approach when the factual predicate is a prior conviction. Unlike its federal analogs, Florida's statute does not contain a knowing scienter for the illicit nature of the controlled substances. Is Florida § 893.13 categorically a serious drug crime under ~ the Sentencing Guidelines? Cf. Shular v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2773 (2019)(certiorari granted). Question Three This Court provides that a criminal judgment becomes final when the opportunity for certiorari review expires or is exhausted. Further, this Court provides that new judicial rules are retroactively applicable to any non-final judgments. Congress enacted the First Step Act before Mr. Golden's conviction became final. Under the Act's amendments Mr. Golden did not violate the Armed Career Criminal Act. Does the First Step Act apply such that Mr. Golden did not violate the ACCA? -i