No. 21-243
Tags: bribery-statute constructive-amendment criminal-procedure indictment indictment-modification jury-instruction jury-instructions plain-error substantial-rights
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the constructive amendment of an indictment by an erroneous jury instruction, stating that conspiracy counts alleged agreements to violate a different bribery statute from that alleged by the grand jury, is prejudicial per se on plain error review?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the constructive amendment of an indictment by an erroneous jury instruction, stating that conspiracy counts alleged agreements to violate a different bribery statute from that alleged by the grand jury, is prejudicial per se on plain error review?
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-01
Reply of petitioner James Warner filed.
2021-11-17
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2021-10-07
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 17, 2021.
2021-10-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 18, 2021 to November 17, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-09-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 18, 2021.
2021-09-08
Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 17, 2021 to October 18, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-08-13
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 17, 2021)
Attorneys
James Warner
Harold Gurewitz — Gurewitz & Raben, PLC, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent