No. 21-5583
Jordan Lee Bell v. United States
Tags: civil-rights constitutional-vagueness criminal-sentencing due-process first-amendment pornographic-matter supervised-release unconstitutionally-vague
Latest Conference:
2021-10-08
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of "any pornographic matter" violate due process as unconstitutionally vague?
2. Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of "any pornographic matter" violate the First Amendment?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does a special condition of supervised release that prohibits possession or control of 'any pornographic matter' violate due process as unconstitutionally vague?
Docket Entries
2021-10-12
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/8/2021.
2021-09-15
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-09-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 7, 2021)
Attorneys
Jordan Lee Bell
United States
Brian H. Fletcher — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent