No. 25-61

Mark Murphy and Jennifer Murphy v. United States

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2025-07-17
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Amici (3)Response Waived Experienced Counsel
Tags: circuit-split controlled-substances criminal-law drug-conspiracy jury-instructions statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2025-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether, in a § 846 prosecution for conspiracy to violate § 841, a trial court errs if it fails to correctly instruct the jury on the elements of the § 841 offense

Question Presented (from Petition)

21 U.S.C. § 846 makes it a crime to “ conspire [] to commit any offense defined in this subchapter .” Prosecutors frequently seek to prove a § 846 violation — as they did in this case —by proving that the defendants conspired to violate 21 U.S.C. § 841, which makes it a federal crime, “[e]xcept as authorized[,] . . . for any person knowingly or intentionally . . . to manufacture, distribute, or dispense . . . a controlled substance.” 84 Stat. 1260, 21 U. S. C. § 841(a) . A core tenet of conspiracy law is that “the failure of the trial court to instruct the jury on the elements of the substantive crimes constituting the objects of the charged conspiracy ” is a “serious error.” United States v. Martinez , 496 F.2d 664, 669 (5th Cir. 1974) ; acco rd United States v. Alghazouli , 517 F.3d 1179, 1189 (9th Cir. 2008) . And in the Fourth and Tenth Circuit s that is the rule for § 846 conspiracies. Th ey hold that a § 846 conviction on a § 841 theory requires the jury to be correctly instructed as to the elements required to violate § 841. But t he Fifth and Eleventh Circuits do not require that . In the decision below, the Eleventh Circuit, in an unpublished opinion, for at least the fourth time, refused to hold that a person cannot be convicted under 21 U.S.C. § 846 for conspiring to violate § 841 unless the jury is correctly instructed as to the elements of § 841. Judge Jordan concurr ed. Eleventh Circuit precedent required him to vote to affirm, he explained, but “ writing on a clean slate ” he “ would find the Tenth Circuit ’s contrary decision in United States v. Kahn , 58 F.4th 1308, 1311 (10th Cir. 2023), more persuasive. ” The question presented is: Whether , in a § 846 prosecution for conspiracy to violate § 841, a trial court errs if it fails to c orrectly instruct the jury on the elements of the § 841 offense . (ii)

Docket Entries

2025-10-06
Petition DENIED.
2025-08-18
Amicus brief of University of Michigan Federal Appellate Litigation Clinic submitted.
2025-08-18
Brief amici curiae of Former Federal Judges Supporting Petitioners filed. (Distributed)
2025-08-18
Brief amici curiae of Former Federal Judges filed. (Distributed)
2025-08-18
Brief amicus curiae of University of Michigan Federal Appellate Litigation Clinic filed.
2025-08-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2025.
2025-07-29
Waiver of United States of right to respond submitted.
2025-07-29
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2025-07-15
2025-04-10
Application (24A968) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until July 15, 2025.
2025-04-08
Application (24A968) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from June 15, 2025 to August 14, 2025, submitted to Justice Thomas.

Attorneys

Former Federal Judges Supporting Petitioners
Jacob Robert Steinberg-OtterSidley Austin LLP, Amicus
Jacob Robert Steinberg-OtterSidley Austin LLP, Amicus
Mark Murphy and Jennifer Murphy
Andrew Timothy TuttArnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Petitioner
Andrew Timothy TuttArnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Petitioner
United States
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
D. John SauerSolicitor General, Respondent
University of Michigan Federal Appellate Litigation Clinic
Ronald William Chapman IIChapman Law Group, Amicus
Ronald William Chapman IIChapman Law Group, Amicus