No. 21-7095
Paul Anthony Darrah v. United States
IFP
Tags: enterprise enterprise-existence first-amendment fourth-amendment free-speech jury-instruction jury-instructions necessity-requirement rico-conspiracy title-iii-wiretap wiretap-authorization
Latest Conference:
2022-06-09
Question Presented (from Petition)
L. Should the jury have been allowed to convict Mr. Darrah on the hypothetical existence of all of the elements of a RICO conspiracy?
II. Did the jury instruction violate Mr. Darrah's right to free speech in violation of the First Amendment by punishing mere talk?
III. Was Mr. Darrah's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches violated by the authorization of Title III wiretaps because the lower courts completely ignored the necessity requirement of 18 U.S.C. § § 2518(1)(c ) and (8)(c)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Should the jury have been allowed to convict on the hypothetical existence of a RICO enterprise?
Docket Entries
2022-06-13
Petition DENIED.
2022-05-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/9/2022.
2022-05-20
Reply of petitioner Paul Darrah filed.
2022-03-31
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 9, 2022.
2022-03-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 13, 2022 to May 9, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-03-10
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 13, 2022.
2022-03-09
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 14, 2022 to April 13, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
2022-02-07
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 14, 2022)
Attorneys
Paul Darrah
Patricia Ann Maceroni — MAACS, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent