Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit erroneously concluded in in finding. Petitioner's Fla. Stat. § 893.13 drug - offense qualifies within the ACCA's definition of a "serious drug offense" where mens rea is not even an implied element of the definition of a "serious drug offense" in § 924(e) or § 4B1.2(b), according to their preceidential opinion in United States v. Smith, 775 F.3d 1.262 (11th Ciro 2014) ?

Whether the Court should grant certiorari to correct the Eleventh Circuit's clear error in United States v. Smith, that a conviction under a strict liability state drug statute is a proper - ACCA predicate in conflict with Elonis and McFadden ?

Whether the preponderance of the evidence finding fails to support an enhancment under § 21<1.1 (b)(1) without any proof in the record that Petitioner had knowledge that the firearms were stolen ?

Whether the elements of a crime with the word "knowingly" means that wens rea requirement must apply to all the ensuing substantive elements of a crime ?

Whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit erroneously concluded that Petitioner's Fla. Stat. § 893.13 drug offense qualifies within the ACCA's definition of a 'serious drug offense' where mens rea is not an implied element