Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Eugene Jackson v. United States
IFP petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 21-13963 · judgment December 13, 2022
Question presented
Consolidated with 22-6389. The Armed Career Criminal Act mandates fifteen years in prison for federal firearm offenses where the defendant has three prior "violent felonies" or "serious drug offenses." The ACCA defines a "serious drug offense" as "an offense under State law, involving manufacturing, distributing, or possessing with intent to manufacture or distribute, a controlled substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)), for which a maximum term of imprisonment often years or more is prescribed by law." 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii) (emphasis added). Four circuits have unanimously held that § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii) incorporates the federal drug schedules in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense to which the ACCA applies. In the decision below, however, the Eleventh Circuit accepted the government's express invitation to reject those circuit decisions. In doing so, the Eleventh Circuit held that § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii) instead incorporates the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the defendant's prior state drug offense. The question presented is: Whether the "serious drug offense" definition in the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii), incorporates the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense (as the Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Tenth Circuits have held), or the federal drug schedules that were in effect at the time of the prior state drug offense (as the Eleventh Circuit held below).1 1 A related question is presented in Altman, et al. v. United States (No. 22-5877) (response requested Nov. 16, 2022) and Brown v. United States (No. 22-6389) (docketed Dec. 23, 2022).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Andrew Lee Adler
Federal Public Defender's Office
For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General
Argument & decision
Argued November 27, 2023 — Jeffrey T. Green · Andrew Adler · Austin Raynor. Audio and transcript
Decided May 23, 2024. Opinion by Alito.
Proceedings
- Jun 24 2024Judgment Issued.
- May 23 2024Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Alito, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Thomas, Sotomayor, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Kagan, J., joined, and in which Gorsuch, J., joined as to Parts I, II, and III. VIDED.
- Nov 27 2023Argued. For petitioner Brown: Jeffrey T. Green, Washington, D. C. For petitioner Jackson: Andrew Adler, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Fort Lauderdale, Fla. For respondent: Austin Raynor, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. VIDED.
- Oct 19 2023CIRCULATED
- Oct 17 2023Record received from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Oct 16 2023Record received from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The record is electronic and is available on PACER.
- Oct 13 2023Record requested from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
- Oct 12 2023SET FOR ARGUMENT on Monday, November 27, 2023. VIDED.
- May 25 2023Because the Court has consolidated these cases for briefing and oral argument, future filings and activity in the cases will now be reflected on the docket of No. 22-6389. Subsequent filings in these cases must therefore be submitted through the electronic filing system in No. 22-6389. Each document submitted in connection with one or more of these cases must include on its cover the case number and caption for each case in which the filing is intended to be submitted. Where a filing is submitted in fewer than all of the cases, the docket entry will reflect the case number(s) in which the filing is submitted; a document filed in all of the consolidated cases will be noted as “VIDED.”
- May 15 2023Motion to proceed in forma pauperis and petition for a writ of certiorari GRANTED. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 22-6389 is granted. The cases are consolidated, and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument. VIDED.
- May 08 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/11/2023.
- Apr 13 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/28/2023.
- Apr 13 2023Reply of petitioner Eugene Jackson filed. (Distributed)
- Apr 06 2023Rescheduled.
- Mar 30 2023DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2023.
- Mar 29 2023Waiver of the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition under Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.
- Mar 24 2023Brief of respondent United States filed.
- Feb 27 2023Brief amicus curiae of Clause 40 Foundation filed.
- Feb 15 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 29, 2023.
- Feb 13 2023Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 27, 2023 to March 29, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jan 24 2023Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 27, 2023)