Should a writ of certiorari be granted to determine if Casamayor's indictment for being a felon in possession of a firearm is valid in light of Rehaif v. United States

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In light of this Court’s decision in Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019) must show that the defendant knew he possessed the firearm and also that he knew he had the relevant status when he possessed it. Although it appears that Casamayor’s prior convictions can easily support a conviction on such a violation, however, the missing “knowledge element” not charged in the indictment, may render the indictment invalid. With that foundation, Casamayor provides the following questions for review: 1. Should a writ of certiorari be granted to determine if in light of Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191 (2019), if Casamayor’s indictment charge for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e) is still valid. 2. In light of Johnson v. United States, 135 8. Ct. 2551 (2015) Johnson ID) and United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) are Casamayor’s convictions for 18 U.S.C. § 924(0) (count 5); and using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to the crime of violence (count 1) and a drug trafficking crime (count 2), 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(a) and 2 (count 6) infirm. ii