No. 23-6394
Andrew Tablack v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 21-usc-841 controlled-substance controlled-substances criminal-law criminal-procedure drug-offense federal-statute indictment indictment-defect scheduling statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Securities
Securities
Latest Conference:
2024-02-16
Question Presented (from Petition)
Is there a legal element in 21 U.S.C. §811(2)(G) that requires the "drug named" in the indictment to be listed as the controlled substance analogues?
2) At the time of the alleged offense, is the omission of an "controlled substance" from 21 U.S.C. §811(2)(G) a fatal defect in the indictment?
3) Does the term "controlled substance analogue" legally exclude a drug that became a Scheduled Controlled Substance through the period of alleged activity?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is there a legal element in 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) that requires the CDS named in the indictment to be listed on the Controlled Substance Schedules at the time of the alleged offenses?
Docket Entries
2024-02-20
Petition DENIED.
2024-01-19
Application (23A661) denied by Justice Alito.
2024-01-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/16/2024.
2024-01-04
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-01-02
Application (23A661) for bail, submitted to Justice Alito.
2023-12-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 29, 2024)
Attorneys
Andrew Tablack
Andrew Tablack — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent