Question Presented (AI Summary)
Which version of federal law should a sentencing court consult under ACCA's categorical approach?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED The Armed Career Criminal Act provides that felons who possess a firearm are normally subject to a maximum 10-year sentence. But if the felon already has at least three “serious drug offense” convictions, then the minimum sentence is fifteen years. Courts decide whether a prior state conviction counts as a serious drug offense using the categorical approach. That requires determining whether the elements of a state drug offense are the same as, or narrower than those of its federal counterpart. If so, the state conviction qualifies as an ACCA predicate. But federal drug law often changes—as here, where Congress decriminalized hemp, narrowing the federal definition of marijuana. If state law doesn’t follow suit, sentencing courts face a categorical conundrum. Under an earlier version of federal law, the state and federal offenses match—and the state offense is an ACCA predicate. Under the amended version, the offenses do not match—and the state offense is not an ACCA predicate. So the version of federal law that the court chooses to consult dictates the difference between serving a 10-year maximum or a 15-year minimum. The question presented is: Which version of federal law should a sentencing court consult under ACCA’s categorical approach?
2023-10-19
Electronic record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
2023-10-13
Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
2023-09-20
Reply of petitioner Eugene Jackson (as to 22-6640) filed.
2023-09-20
Reply of petitioner Justin Rashaad Brown (as to 22-6389) filed.
2023-08-21
Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix in No. 22-6640 filed by petitioner GRANTED.
2023-07-19
Brief amicus curiae of Clause 40 Foundation (in 22-6640) filed.
2023-07-17
Notice of Substitution of Counsel of Record filed on behalf of petitioner (as to 22-6389).
2023-07-12
Brief of petitioner Eugene Jackson (as to 22-6640) filed.
2023-07-12
Joint appendix (as to 22-6389) filed. (Statement of costs filed)
2023-07-12
Brief of petitioner Justin Rashaad Brown (as to 22-6389) filed.
2023-06-13
Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner (as to 22-6640).
2023-05-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/11/2023.
2023-04-13
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/28/2023.
2023-04-12
Reply of petitioner Justin Rashaad Brown filed. (Distributed)
2023-03-24
Brief of respondent United States filed.
2023-02-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including March 24, 2023.
2023-02-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 22, 2023 to March 24, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-01-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 22, 2023.
2023-01-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 23, 2023 to February 22, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-12-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 23, 2023)
2022-11-22
Application (22A453) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until December 28, 2022.
2022-11-18
Application (22A453) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from November 27, 2022 to December 28, 2022, submitted to Justice Alito.