Whether the Supreme Court should correct the Second Circuit's split from other Circuit Courts in addressing the recurring question of the validity of a pleaded-to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction after United States v. Davis

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. Whether the Supreme Court should correct the Second Circuit’s split from other Circuit Courts in addressing the recurring question of the validity of a pleaded-to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction after United States v. Davis, U.S. 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). The Second Circuit erred by applying the plain error standard of United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 124 S. Ct. 2333 (2004), applicable to Rule 11 colloquy errors. Instead, the court should have asked whether there was legally sufficient proof of a constitutionally valid predicate to support the § 924(c) charge, and absent such proof, vacated Mr. Dussard’s unconstitutional conviction.