BOBBY CHEN, PETITIONER,

v.

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE, MARYLAND, ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (U.S. 2015)
  …. 572 U.S. ----, 134 S.Ct. 1871, 188 L.Ed.2d 910 (2014). We later asked the parties to present reargument addressing the compatibility of the residual clause with the Constitution's prohibition of vague criminal laws. 574 U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 939, 190 L.Ed.2d 718 (2015). II The Fifth Amendment provides that "[n]o person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Our cases establish that the Government violates this guarantee by taking away someone's life, liberty, or…
• United States v. Sineneng-Smith, 140 S. Ct. 1575 (U.S. 2020)
  …2d 490 (2016) (in a case about availability of a bond hearing under a statute mandating detention of certain noncitizens, briefing ordered on whether the Constitution requires such a hearing); Johnson v. United States , 574 U.S. 1069, 135 S.Ct. 939, 190 L.Ed.2d 718 (2015) (in a case involving interpretation of the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause, briefing ordered on whether that clause is unconstitutionally vague). But in both cases, the parties had raised the relevant constitutional challenge in…
• United States v. Durham, 795 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir. 2015)
  …sentence as substantively unreasonable but he did not raise any issue involving application of the ACCA to him. In January of 2015, the Supreme Court ordered reargument and supplemental briefing in Johnson v. United States, — U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 939, 190 L.Ed.2d 718 (2015), on the issue of whether the residual clause of the ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii), is unconstitutionally vague. A few days later, the government filed its answer brief in Durham’s appeal, which did not mention the ACCA. He did-not file a…