No. 21-6844
Pedro Rafael Caraballo-Martinez v. United States
Tags: criminal-procedure due-process harmless-error jury-instruction multiple-theory-error predicate-offense statutory-interpretation unconstitutional-vagueness united-states-v-davis vagueness
Latest Conference:
2022-02-18
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) may be sustained based on the reviewing court's finding that the jury relied equally on a valid predicate offense and a predicate offense that was obtained in reliance on the unconstitutionally vague residual clause invalidated in United States v Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2319 (2019)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) may be sustained based on the reviewing court's finding that the jury relied equally on a valid predicate offense and a predicate offense that was obtained in reliance on the unconstitutionally vague residual clause
Docket Entries
2022-02-22
Petition DENIED.
2022-01-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/18/2022.
2022-01-18
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-01-11
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 14, 2022)
Attorneys
Pedro Caraballo-Martinez
Bernardo Lopez — Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent