ANTONIO TASTE, PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED STATES.

U.S. | 2015-06-30
No. 14–8848.
135 S. Ct. 2938 Supreme Court of the United States (2015) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 192 L. Ed. 2d 965
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Supreme Court vacated and remanded Antonio Taste's conviction to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of the Court's decision in Johnson v. United States, which struck down the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act as unconstitutionally vague. The Court's action did not indicate whether Taste would ultimately be entitled to relief on remand, leaving that determination to the appeals court.

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperisand petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit for further consideration in light of Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 2551, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2015).

Justice ALITOconcurring in the decision to grant, vacate, and remand in this case: Following the recommendation of the Solicitor General, the Court has held the petition in this and many other cases pending the decision in Johnson v. United States,576 U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 2551, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2015). In holding this petition and now in vacating and remanding the decision below in this case, the Court has not differentiated between cases in which the petitioner would be entitled to relief if the Court held (as it now has) that the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924(e)(2)(B)(ii), is void for vagueness and cases in which relief would not be warranted for a procedural reason. On remand, the Court of Appeals should understand that the Court's disposition of this petition does not reflect any view regarding petitioner's entitlement to relief.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Merrill Lynch v. Manning, 136 S. Ct. 1562 (U.S. 2016)
    …sive forum under § 27. Merrill Lynch sought this Court's review solely as to whether § 27 commits Manning's case to federal court. See Pet. for Cert. i. Because of a Circuit split about that provision's meaning, we granted certiorari. 576 U.S. ----, 135 S.Ct. 2938, 192 L.Ed.2d 975 (2015). We now affirm. II Like the Third Circuit, we read § 27 as conferring exclusive federal jurisdiction of the same suits as "aris[e] under" the Exchange Act pursuant to the general federal question statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 133…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw