The Sixth Circuit has declined to apply the Supreme Court's decisions in Lopez v. Gonzales, 549 U.S. 47 (2006), Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 560 U.S. 563 (2010), and Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 185 (2013), in the criminal context, and has held these cases all apply solely "under the Immigration and Nationality Act [INA]. ... Because these cases dealt solely with the INA" for deportation purposes.

This has created a direct and apparent conflict between the Sixth Circuit and the other circuits who have applied the above cases in the criminal context, and a conflict with the Supreme Court's rulings in these cases.

Should the Supreme Court use its supervisory authority to resolve this conflict that has a great importance to defendants in the Sixth Circuit?

I.

The Sixth Circuit has refused to apply the "categorical approach" to convictions and sentences under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), (b)(1)(B), and (b)(1)(C), and 21 U.S.C. §§ 851 and 802(44), where all the other circuits have applied the categorical approach to the convictions and sentences listed above; creating a direct and apparent conflict, where the Sixth Circuit is the sole circuit who has declined to apply the categorical approach.

Should this Court use its supervisory power to ensure uniformity in all the circuits on a matter with such importance?

II.

There exist a direct and apparent conflict in the circuits as to the correct interpretation of the Supreme Court's ruling in Cobb v. Texas, 532 U.S. 162 (2001). The correct interpretation of Cobb v. Texas is a great importance not heretofore been considered by this Court, and one over which the circuits are divided, and is ripe for reexamination due to the conflicting interpretations coming out of the Circuits.

III.

Should this Court use its supervisory power to ensure uniformity in the circuits as to this Court's correct interpretation of Cobb v. Texas?

IV.

Should the Supreme Court use its supervisory authority to resolve the conflict between the Sixth Circuit and other circuits on applying the Supreme Court's decisions in Lopez v. Gonzales, Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, and Moncrieffe v. Holder in the criminal context?