Price v. United States
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving the Sixth Circuit’s ruling in place without deciding which federal drug schedules apply.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 26, 2020
- What it’s about
- The case concerned whether a prior state drug conviction counts as a “serious drug offense” under the Armed Career Criminal Act based on the federal drug schedules in effect when the defendant committed the later federal firearm offense.
- Who it affects
- The denial left the Sixth Circuit’s ruling for the United States in place in Price’s case, but the Supreme Court did not decide which federal drug schedules apply.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court denied review, leaving the Sixth Circuit’s ruling for the United States in place without deciding the issue on the merits.
The dispute arose from a federal firearm case involving a prior state drug conviction.
Question presented
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 in effect at the time of the federal firearm offense?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished this docket action. The Sixth Circuit’s ruling remains in place, and this petition produced no Supreme Court decision on the legal question.
Documents
Opinions
Key filings
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
More questions
- Did the denial endorse either side’s arguments?
- No. It was a refusal to hear the case, not a decision for either side on the drug-schedule question.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.