No. 21-6361

Marcus Crawley, aka Holyfield v. United States

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2021-11-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: constitutional-vagueness criminal-procedure davis-v-united-states due-process judicial-review plea-agreement plea-bargaining sentencing sixth-amendment statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a reviewing court may search plea documents for evidence of another predicate to sustain a § 924(c) conviction when that predicate was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt or admitted to by the defendant

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED In United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019), the Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)’s crime of violence residual clause was unconstitutionally vague. The question presented is: If a defendant pleaded guilty to a § 924(c) charge and a predicate crime of violence that is no longer valid after Davis, may a reviewing court search plea documents for evidence of another predicate to sustain the § 924(c) conviction when that predicate was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt or admitted to by the defendant?

Docket Entries

2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-01
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-11-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2021)

Attorneys

Marcus Crawley
Daniel Scott HarawaWashington University in St. Louis School of Law, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent