No. 24-5098
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (3)IFP
Tags: actus-reus crime-of-violence criminal-law mens-rea rule-of-lenity sentencing statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2025-03-28
(distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether 21 U.S.C. § 848(e)(1)(A) represents a qualifying 'crime of violence' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), and how the rule of lenity should properly be applied
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED I. Whether this Court should grant a writ of certiorari to determine whether 21 U.S.C. § 848(e)(1)(A) represents a qualifying “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), and to clarify how the rule of lenity should properly be applied? ii
Docket Entries
2025-03-31
Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2025-03-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2025.
2024-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2024.
2024-10-23
Brief of respondent United States filed.
2024-09-19
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 23, 2024.
2024-09-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 23, 2024 to October 23, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-08-22
Response Requested. (Due September 23, 2024)
2024-08-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-30
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2024-07-30
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-07-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 16, 2024)
Attorneys
Gerald Smith
Gregory Stuart Smith — Law Offices of Gregory S. Smith, Petitioner
Gregory Stuart Smith — Law Offices of Gregory S. Smith, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. Harris — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. Harris — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent