No. 22-6389

Justin Rashaad Brown v. United States

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2022-12-23
Status: Judgment Issued
Type: IFP
Amici (1)Relisted (2)IFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: armed-career-criminal-act categorical-approach drug-offense federal-law sentencing sentencing-enhancement state-conviction state-law
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2023-05-11 (distributed 2 times)
Related Cases: 22-6640 (Vide)
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?

Docket Entries

2024-06-24
Judgment Issued.
2023-10-19
Electronic record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
2023-10-19
CIRCULATED
2023-10-13
Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
2023-09-20
2023-09-20
2023-08-21
Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix in No. 22-6640 filed by petitioner GRANTED.
2023-07-19
2023-07-17
Notice of Substitution of Counsel of Record filed on behalf of petitioner (as to 22-6389).
2023-07-12
2023-07-12
Joint appendix (as to 22-6389) filed. (Statement of costs filed)
2023-07-12
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
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.

Attorneys

Clause 40 Foundation
Douglas Eugene LitvackJenner & Block LLP, Amicus
Douglas Eugene LitvackJenner & Block LLP, Amicus
Eugene Jackson
Andrew Lee AdlerFederal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Andrew Lee AdlerFederal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
FAMM
Christopher George MichelQuinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Amicus
Christopher George MichelQuinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP, Amicus
Justin Rashaad Brown
Ronald A. KraussFederal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Ronald A. KraussFederal Public Defender's Office, Petitioner
Jeffrey T. GreenSidley Austin, Petitioner
Jeffrey T. GreenSidley Austin, Petitioner
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Daniel Edward JonesMayer Brown, LLP, Amicus
Daniel Edward JonesMayer Brown, LLP, Amicus
National Association of Federal Defenders
Ginger D. AndersMunger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Amicus
Ginger D. AndersMunger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Amicus
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent