No. 22-84
Tags: controlled-substances-act conviction-appeal criminal-law due-process jury-instruction physician-conviction ruan-standard ruan-v-united-states scienter statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2022-10-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court should grant, vacate, and remand a judgment sustaining the conviction of a physician under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether this Court should grant, vacate, and remand a judgment sustaining the conviction of a physician under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) where the jury was given a scienter instruction that is flatly inconsistent with this Court’s recent decision in Ruan v. United States, 142 8. Ct. 2370 (2022). (i)
Docket Entries
2022-11-14
Judgment issued.
2022-10-11
Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light of <i>Xiulu Ruan </i> v. <i>United States</i>, 597 U. S. ___ (2022).
2022-09-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/7/2022.
2022-08-29
Memorandum for the United States filed.
2022-07-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 29, 2022)
Attorneys
Saad Sakkal
Lawrence Saul Robbins — Kramer Levin Robbins Russell, Petitioner
Lawrence Saul Robbins — Kramer Levin Robbins Russell, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent