Fifth Amendment void-for-vagueness challenge to "mixture or substance" or analogue provisions

DEFENSE · 21usc841:x-vagueness

Evaluated as applied to the facts of the case because § 841 implicates no First Amendment freedoms.

Exact element source

1 gram or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD);

Source: docroot/ir/usc/title21.jsonl#title21_sec841; Unicode character offsets [5386:5494] (end exclusive); SHA-256 ebaba73bf6e21a591f44bf851f24a052a5687813c505030cd9483e17753e9420.

All variants

Recorded DB variant labels, including zero-count variants
Variant	Description	Merits instance blocks	Distinct cases	Example cases (up to 3 per group)
as-applied/sentencing-term-not-vague		0 Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 1	0	No counted merits examples Excluded context examples: /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 — applied/procedural

How courts decided this element

Annotation blocks, including explicitly excluded context
Case	Element	Holding and scope	Variant	Exact source quotations
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991	Fifth Amendment void-for-vagueness challenge to "mixture or substance" or analogue provisions	not Excluded from merits counts applied / procedural basis: law; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v)	as-applied/sentencing-term-not-vague	First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01`; Unicode character offsets [22168:22313] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c`. Evidence kind: rule; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged) The fact that there may be plausible arguments against describing blotter paper impregnated with LSD as a “mixture or substance” containing LSD does not mean that the statute is vague. Source: `docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01`; Unicode character offsets [22364:22548] (end exclusive); SHA-256 `9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c`. Evidence kind: held; polarity: not recorded; absent flag: 0; quoted-rule flag: 0 (1 = tagged; 0 = not tagged)

Court interpretations

interpretation

First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case.

/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991

First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case.

Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [22168:22313] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.

Evaluated as applied to the facts of the case because § 841 implicates no First Amendment freedoms.