No. 20-338

Johnny Clyde Benjamin, Jr. v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2020-09-15
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: 11th-circuit controlled-substances-act criminal-indictment federal-district-court furanyl-fentanyl indictment jurisdictional-defect statutory-interpretation subject-matter-jurisdiction
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2020-10-09
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the district court have subject matter jurisdiction over this case?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Federal district courts have their jurisdiction limited to violations of laws of the United States. During the period of indictment, the handling of furanyl fentanyl (Fu-f) did not violate the charged statute, the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Did the district court have subject matter jurisdiction over this case? INDICTING LEGAL CONDUCT IS A JURISDICTIONAL DEFECT The 11th Circuit has long held that in an indictment the affirmative allegation of specific conduct not forbidden by the charged statute is a jurisdictional defect. During the period of indictment, the handling of Fu-f (alleged specific conduct) was not forbidden by the Controlled Substances Act (charged statute). Did the indictment contain a jurisdictional defect? i

Docket Entries

2020-10-13
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/9/2020.
2020-09-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2020-09-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 15, 2020)

Attorneys

Johnny Clyde Benjamin, Jr.
Johnny Clyde Benjamin Jr. — Petitioner
Johnny Clyde Benjamin Jr. — Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. WallActing Solicitor General, Respondent