No. 21-5804
Kenneth Randale Door v. United States
IFP
Tags: circuit-split criminal-law criminal-procedure evidence evidence-sufficiency judgment-of-acquittal jurisdiction plain-error rehaif-standard rehaif-v-united-states
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is review of a claim that the evidence was insufficient to establish the knowledge of status required by Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019), limited to review for plain error when the defendant did not make a specific Rehaif argument but did make a general motion for judgment of acquittal?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Is review of a claim that the evidence was insufficient to establish the knowledge of status required by Rehaif'v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019), limited to review for plain error when the defendant did not make a specific Rehaif argument but did make a general motion for judgment of acquittal? i
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-15
Reply of petitioner Kenneth Randale Door filed.
2021-12-09
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2021-11-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 9, 2021.
2021-11-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 29, 2021 to December 9, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-10-22
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 29, 2021.
2021-10-21
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 28, 2021 to November 29, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 28, 2021)
Attorneys
Kenneth Randale Door
Carlton Frederick Gunn — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent