Whether a defective indictment that omits an element of the charged offense deprives the defendant of Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Fifth Amendment a Grand Jury indictment or due process of law before the government can require a defendant to answer for a felony. See U.S. Const., amend. V. Also, the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause prevents a felony conviction by a petit jury unless the government has proved every element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Id. The Sixth Amendment requires that a defendant in a criminal case “be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusation”. U.S. Const., amend. VI. Although appellate courts agree that violating these Constitutional protections is an obvious error, and there’s an assumption such errors affect substantial rights, appellate courts disagree whether such violations seriously impact the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings like United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 736 (1993) requires to grant relief. Moreover, unlike cases where juries heard sufficient evidence to convict a defendant of a charged offense such that this Court could find the plain error factor wasn’t established, the jury in Mr. Battiste’s case heard no evidence of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)’s knowledge-of-status element and the Seventh Circuit nevertheless affirmed Mr. Battiste’s conviction by relying on facts the jury never heard. See United States v. Maez, 960 F.3d 949, 966 (7th Cir. 2020). That approach conflicts with United States v. Medley, 972 F.3d 399, 418-19 (4th Cir. 2020). This Court should resolve the circuit split. The questions presented are: ii 1. Ifa grand jury indicts a defendant for violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), but omits the statute’s knowledge-of-status element, has the defective indictment deprived the defendant of the Fifth Amendment right not to answer for a crime unless it’s presented to the grand jury as well as the Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation? 2. Ifa petit jury finds a defendant guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) without considering the statute’s knowledge-of-status element or having the government present any evidence of that element, does the conviction violate the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause? 3. When engaging in plain error review, can an appellate court look to facts never presented to a petit jury and rely on them to determine that a defendant is unable to establish a defect that seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of a judicial proceeding? iii