Intent in racketeering charges
Phillip Timothy Howard v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
- What it’s about
- Phillip Timothy Howard sought Supreme Court review after the Eleventh Circuit upheld his conviction and sentence; he argued that he pleaded guilty to avoid a lengthy trial and that the record did not show criminal intent or that he caused harm.
- Who it affects
- The dismissal ended Howard’s request for Supreme Court review but did not resolve his claims about criminal intent or harm.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court threw out his petition (dismissed it) under Rule 46 without deciding the substance of his claims.
Howard said he pleaded guilty to avoid a lengthy trial.
Howard’s challenge focused on whether the record showed criminal intent or that he caused harm.
Question presented
there was no evidence of mens rea , because Dr. Howard did not proximately cause harm to any alleged victim and was not guilty of a RICO of one?
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
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.