Should the Court grant certiorari to resolve the Circuit split regarding the plain error rule between the Second and Fourth Circuits as it applies to 18 U.S.C. 922 (g) (Felon in possession of a weapon)

Questions Presented 1. Should the Court grant certiorari to resolve the Circuit split regarding the plain error rule between the Second and Fourth Circuits as it applies to 18 U.S.C. 922 (g) (Felon in possession of a weapon) where Petitioner was convicted without an allegation of the essential element of knowledge of felon status in the indictment and without any proof of knowledge of his felon status established at trial? 2. Should the Court grant certiorari where Petitioner received wrong and incomplete advice about the use of drug enhancements at sentencing where his attorney admitted at a hearing that he was not aware that such enhancements could be used if Petitioner was not convicted of the drug charges but they were in fact used to dramatically increase his sentence where Petitioner was convicted of Tampering with a witness? i Parties and Related Cases The names of all parties appear on the caption of the case on the cover page and there are no other additional parties. The related cases are United States v. James Edward Sandford, Western District of New York, Docket No. 15: 6101 judgment date on the jury trial conviction and sentence January 4, 2018 and judgment date on the Rule 33 motion December 7, 2018. United States v. James Edward Sandford, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Docket No. 18-0288, and United States v. James Edward Sandford, Docket No. 18-3703, consolodated appeals with joint arguments and Summary Order and Mandate filed on May 29, 2020. ii