Whether the statutory penalties in § 404(a) of the First Step Act modify the entire phrase — 'a violation of a Federal criminal statute' — or whether that phrase instead modifies the last antecedent — 'a Federal criminal statute

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Eleventh Circuit held below that Steven Jones’s prior conviction qualified as a “covered offense” under § 404(a) of the First Step Act because his prior “violation” of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) involved crack-cocaine. But the Eleventh Circuit nonetheless held that he was ineligible for a reduced sentence under § 404(b) because his “violation” involved more than 280 grams of crack cocaine (as found by the district court at Mr. Jones’s preApprendi sentencing hearing). The questions presented are: I. Whether “statutory penalties” in § 404(a) of the First Step Act modifies the entire phrase — “a violation of a Federal criminal statute” — as the Eleventh Circuit held below, or whether that phrase instead modifies the last antecedent — “a Federal criminal statute” — as every other Circuit has held? II. Whether, as the Eleventh Circuit held below (in conflict with other Circuits), § 404(b) binds a district court to drug-found quantities made at a pre Apprendi sentencing hearing when determining a defendant’s statutory penalty range for purposes of § 404? A third question arises in light of an intervening published decision from the Eleventh Circuit: III. Should this Court grant, vacate, and remand to the Eleventh Circuit to reconsider Mr. Jones’s appeal in light of United States v. Taylor,__ F.3d __, 2020 WL 7239632 (11th Cir. Dec. 9, 2020)? i