No. 21-5633

Roland J. McLain v. United States

Lower Court: Seventh Circuit
Docketed: 2021-09-10
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: career-offender circuit-split controlled-substance criminal-law due-process federal-guidelines federal-sentencing-guidelines sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the phrase 'controlled substance' in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b) includes substances excluded from the Controlled Substances Act

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED A defendant convicted of violating the Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 801, et seq. (the “CSA”) is a “career offender” under the United States Sentencing Guidelines if, among other things, he “has at least two prior felony convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a). The Guidelines define “controlled substance offense,” in part, as “an offense under federal or state law, punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, that prohibits the manufacture, import, export, distribution, or dispensing of a controlled substance.” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b) (emphasis added). Further, the Guideline applicable to a felon in possession, U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1, increases a defendant’s base offense level if a defendant has prior “controlled substance offenses,” as that term is used in the career offender Guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2. The questions presented are: 1. Does the phrase "controlled substance" in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b), including as it is incorporated into U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1, include substances that are excluded from the CSA? 2. When defining an operative, but undefined, term in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, should courts use analogous federal statutory definitions, should they use State statutory definitions, or should they use a judge-made "natural meaning" of that term? ii

Docket Entries

2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-11-12
Memorandum of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2021-10-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 12, 2021. See Rule 30.1
2021-10-05
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 12, 2021 to November 11, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 12, 2021)

Attorneys

Roland J. McLain
Thomas A BrodnikMcNeely Law, Petitioner
Thomas A BrodnikMcNeely Law, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent