No. 23-5587
Daniel Carrington v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: burden-of-proof causation controlled-substance controlled-substances criminal-law death-causation due-process proximate-cause reasonable-doubt statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference:
2023-10-06
Question Presented (from Petition)
WHETHER THIS COURT'S DECISION IN UNITED STATES V. BURRAGE, 571 U.S. 204 (2014), CREATED A BRIGHT LINE RULE ESTABLISHING A RIGHT OF THE DEFENDANT TO PROOF BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE DECEDENT'S DEATH WAS THE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, ALONE, DISTRI BUTED BY THE DEFENDANT; THAT IS, PROOF, THAT "BUT. FOR" THE OMRCLLED SUBSTANCE THE DECEDENT WOULD NOT HAVE EXPIRED AND/OR NO OTHER FACT, CIRCUMSTANCE, OR EVENT, OCCURRING NATURALLY OR OTHERWISE CAN BE SAID TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEATH OF THE DECEDENT?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Court's decision in United States v. Burrage created a bright line rule on proof of proximate cause
Docket Entries
2023-10-10
Petition DENIED.
2023-09-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/6/2023.
2023-09-19
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-06-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 16, 2023)
Attorneys
Daniel Carrington
Daniel Carrington — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent