No. 20-6439

Sidney Patterson v. United States

Lower Court: Fifth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-11-25
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: criminal-activity due-process legislative-intent racketeering rico rico-statute sufficiency-of-evidence unsophisticated-crime vague-statute
Latest Conference: 2021-01-08
Question Presented (from Petition)

A conviction based on less than sufficient evidence is a due process violation.

1. Does the application of a vaguely written racketeering statute to prosecute unsophisticated criminal activity not contemplated by the legislative intent of RICO run afoul of due process requirements?

2. If the government fails to show that two or more persons joined together to pursue any unlawful objective and that there was no functioning cohesive RICO enterprise, can a conviction for a Federal Controlled Substances Act (FCS) conspiracy stand?

3. If the government fails to show a functioning RICO enterprise, coupled with a general lack of sufficient evidence, can a murder conviction stand?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the application of a vaguely written racketeering statute to prosecute unsophisticated criminal activity not contemplated by the legislative intent of RICO run afoul of due process requirements?

Docket Entries

2021-01-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
Main Document
2020-11-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 28, 2020)
PetitionAppendixMotion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisProof of Service

Attorneys

Sidney Patterson
Autumn Town — Law Office of Autumn Town, Petitioner
United States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent