No. 18-597
John Ching En Lee v. United States
Tags: agency-decision ambiguous-question false-statement false-statement-defense literal-truth materiality mens-rea real-world-context statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2019-02-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. When determining whether an alleged false statement has a literal truth defense, may a court isolate the ambiguous question or view it in the totality of its real-world context?
2. After Ajoku, to meet the requisite mens rea under 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2), must a defendant have knowledge or a reckless disregard that the underlying conduct of the lie was unlawful?
3. Does Maslenjak's "materiality" requirement demand that the government establish that a false statement influenced an actual decision of an agency?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When determining whether an alleged false statement has a literal truth defense, may a court isolate the ambiguous question or view it in the totality of its real-world context?
Docket Entries
2019-02-19
Petition DENIED.
2019-01-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/15/2019.
2019-01-22
Reply of petitioner John Lee filed.
2019-01-07
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2018-12-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including January 7, 2019.
2018-12-04
Motion to extend the time to file a response from December 6, 2018 to January 7, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2018-11-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due December 6, 2018)
2018-08-24
Application (18A203) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until November 2, 2018.
2018-08-21
Application (18A203) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from September 4, 2018 to November 3, 2018, submitted to The Chief Justice.
Attorneys
John Lee
Kari Elisabeth Hong — Boston College Law School, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent