Document: 526 U.S. 1119 S.Ct. 966143 L.Ed.2d 1 HOLLOWAY v. UNITED STATES(97-7164)126 F.3d 82, affirmed. SUPREME COURT OF THE STATES119 966 143 No. 97 7164 FRANCOIS HOLLOWAY, aka ABDU ALI, PETITIONER STATES ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO APPEALS FOR SECOND CIRCUIT [March 2, 1999] Justice Stevens delivered the opinion of Court. Carjacking "with intent to cause death or serious bodily harm" is a federal crime.1 The question presented in this case whether that phrase requires Government prove defendant had an unconditional kill harm all events, it merely proof if necessary effect carjacking. Most judges who have considered concluded, as do we, Congress intended criminalize more typical carjacking carried out by means deliberate threat violence, rather than just rare which has use violence regardless how driver responds his threat. 2 * A jury found petitioner guilty on three counts carjacking, well several other offenses related stealing cars.2 In each carjackings, and armed accomplice identified car they wanted followed until was parked. then approached driver, produced gun, threatened shoot unless handed over keys.3 testified plan steal cars without harming victims, but he would used gun any drivers given him "hard time." When one victim hesitated, punched face there no actual violence. 3 District Judge instructed required beyond reasonable doubt taking motor vehicle committed with "to person from whom taken." App. 29. After explaining using frighten not sufficient such intent, added following statement defendant's objection: 4 "In some cases, conditional. That is, de- fendant may intend engage certain conduct only event occurs. 5 case, government contends alleged victims refused turn their cars. If you find satisfied element offense ." Id., at 30. 6 postverdict motion for new trial, contended instruction inconsistent text statute. denied motion, stating "is issue precisely what general public describe prohibit §2119." 921 F. Supp. 155, 156 (EDNY 1996). He noted statute originally enacted 1992 contained covered carjackings "possessing firearm." 1994 amendment omitted firearm limitation, thus broadening coverage encompass weapons, also inserted requirement case. judge thought "odd result" flow construction "would longer very crime address except those unusual circumstances when carjackers commit another murder assault." 159. Moreover, determined even though conditional been discussed often, least courts, concept scholars state courts long recognized. 7 Over dissent accused majority "a clear judicial usurpation congressional authority," United States Arnold, 126 92 (CA2 1997) (opinion Miner, J.), Court Appeals "the inclusion within definition specific well-established principle common law," also, "most importantly," comported interpretation legislative purpose statute." 88. alternative interpretation, cover "only carjacker's sole time maim victim," court clearly odds statute's drafters. Ibid. 8 To resolve apparent conflict decision Ninth Circuit, Randolph, 93 656 (1996),4 we granted certiorari. 523 ___ (1998). II 9 Writing Turkette, 452 576, 593 (1981), White reminded us language statutes enacts provides most reliable evidence its intent." For reason, typically begin task statutory focusing words drafters chosen. interpreting issue, "[w]e consider bare meaning" critical word "but placement scheme." Bailey States, 516 137, 145 (1995). 10 sort evil motive More precisely, points having decided pull trigger does comply demand keys, possesses moment, seriously driver. our view, answer depend immediately hands keys offender decides after gains control car. At relevant plainly forbidden intent. 11 opinions addressed accurately point be either "conditional" "unconditional." theoretically might (1) former, (2) latter, (3) both species Petitioner argues "plain text" "unequivocally" describes latter: must possess order complete proscribed offense. end, insists insert "if necessary" into disputed include scope See Reply Brief 2. Because did words, assume meant provide penalty actually attempted (or so resisted). 12 We believe, however, commonsense reading counsels broader attempts assault course automobile robberies. As repeatedly stated, " 'the meaning language, plain not, depends context.' Brown Gardner, 513 115, 118 (1994) (quoting King St. Vincent's Hospital, 502 215, 221 (1991)). petitioner's argument context statute, becomes proffered overlooks significance essentially aimed providing particular type robbery. mens rea component modifies act "tak[ing]" vehicle. It directs factfinder's attention mind precise moment demanded took "by force intimidation." scienter satisfied. 13 Petitioner's element, contrast, improperly transform modifier additional actus reus statute; alter focuses attempting robbery vehicle.6 Indeed, accepted view Congress' insertion qualifying necessary," themselves, solved deficiency believes exists excluded Accordingly, needed add something like "or harm. Given fact mention separately expressly exclude naturally read limit reach crimes involving attempt 14 Two considerations strongly support conclusion natural fully consistent First, whole reflects authorize prosecutions significant deterrent criminal activity matter national concern.7 better served construing wrongful entire normal chose. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. Harris Trust Sav. Bank, 510 86, 94 95 (1993) (statutory should interpreted consonant provisions law, object policy" (internal quotation marks omitted)). obviously prohibit. 15 Second, presume familiar cases scholarly writing recognized "specific intent" Cannon University Chicago, 441 677, 696 698 (1979). facts leading are strikingly similar People Connors, 253 Ill. 266, N. E. 643 (1912), Illinois Supreme affirmed conviction union organizer pointed worker forthwith take off overalls quit work. held properly kill" could "coupled condition" fire complied demand.8 holding cited approval scholars.10 views endorsed authors Model Criminal Code.11 core emerges these sources negate requiring condition right impose; "[a]n kill, alternative, nevertheless kill."12 16 This suggests, render superfluous intimidation" element. While empty threat, intimidating bluff, satisfy latter conduct, standing own, enough §2119's element.13 surrendered otherwise lost inflict, inflicting, harm, action 17 short, disagree Act think unreasonable enact truncated version important statute.14 §2119 proves driver's possessed (or, alternatively, unnecessary car). affirm judgment Appeals. 18 ordered. Notes 19 1. amended Violent Crime Control Law Enforcement 1994, §60003(a) (14), 108 Stat. 1970, Correction 1996, §2, 110 3020, provides: "Whoever, takes transported, shipped, received interstate foreign commerce presence intimidation, so, shall "(1) fined under title imprisoned years, both, "(2) injury (as defined section 1365 title, including that, occurred special maritime territorial jurisdiction violate 2241 2242 title) results, 25 "(3) number years up life, sentenced death." U.S.C. § 2119 (1994 ed. III) (emphasis added). 20 charged conspiring operate "chop shop" violation 371 operating chop shop §2322, carrying §924(c). 21 3. One threatened, 'Get I'll shoot.' 51. Another said, 'Give me your I will now.' 52. 22 4. Circuit neither person's mere 'she okay she [did] told her' nor brandishing weapon, more" constituted §2119. F.3d, 664 665. therefore reversed ground insufficient evidence. opinion, stated broadly "[t]he resists simply requirement." proposition disagreed. Williams, 136 547, 550 551 (CA8 1998), cert. pending, 9553; 89, n. 1997); Romero, 122 1334, 1338 (CA10 1997), denied, (1998); Anderson, 478, 481 483 (CA3), 522 U. S 843 (1997). 23 5. See, e.g., 551; 481. 24 6. Although subsections envision resulting crime, subsection (1), reading, resulted. 7. history relating sparse, members recorded comments made statements reflecting broad purpose. 139 Cong. Rec. 27867 (statement Sen. Lieberman) ("Th[e 1994] broaden strengthen th[e] [carjacking] law attorneys every possible tool available them attack problem"); 140 E858 (May 5, 1994) (extension remarks Rep. Franks) ("We send message [carjackers] committing violent carry severe penalty"). There nothing amendment's suggest create unique subset intends accedes offender's 26 8. trial jury: ' instructs indictment prosecuting witness, Morgan H. Bell, still, believe intention defendants defendants, them, acting others, revolver said Bell compelling work, formed minds shooting prevented happening compliance work met.' Ill., 272 273, E., 645. 27 9. Vandelinder, 192 Mich. 447, 451, W. 2d 787, 789 (1992) (endorsing Connors); Eby State, 154 Ind. 509, 517, 290 (1973) (same); Beall 203 Md. 380, 386, 101 A. 233, 236 (1953) Price 79 S. 283, 284 (Tenn. 1935) (same). But see State Irwin, 55 C. 305, 205 345 (1982) (reaching opposite conclusion); Kinnemore, 34 Ohio 39, 295 680 (1972) 28 10. Lafave & Scott, Substantive §3.5(d), p. 312 (1986); R. Perkins Boyce, 646 647, 835 (3d 1982); J. Bishop, Bishop §287a (9th 1923); Brill, Cyclopedia §409, 692 (1922); Alexander Kessler, Mens Rea Inchoate Crimes, 87 Crim. L. 1138, 1140 1147 Torcia, Wharton's §182 (15th (supporting citing Connors). 29 11. Section 2.02(6) Penal Code "Requirement Purpose Satisfied Conditional. offense, established although conditional, negatives sought defining offense." American Institute, (1985). Of course, surrender prevent. 30 12. Law, 647. 31 13. somewhat different contexts, itself constitute kill. Hairston 54 Miss. 689 (1877), example, angry profane manner stopped mules. assault, murder, "we upon levelling pistol." 694. Myers Clearman, 125 Iowa 461, 464, 193, 194 (1904) (in determining acted great "whether accused, aiming [the victim], inflict frightening her"). 32 14. reject rule lenity apply '[t]he applies if, seizing everything aid can derived, make guess intended.' Muscarello 524 ___, (1998) (slip op., 14) Wells, 519 482, 499 (1997)) (additional quotations citations omitted). Accord, Ladner 358 169, 178 (1958). result preceding analysis Scalia, J., dissenting 33 35 36 dissenting. 37 phrase, harm." (For convenience' sake, refer kill.) recounted Court, accomplice, Vernon Lennon, "testified 'hard time.'" Ante, Today's holds correct. 38 because following, utterly central, passage opinion: 39 "[A] 'conditional' 'unconditional.' (footnote 40 think, contrary, customary English usage unqualified "intent" usually connote subject conditions precedent remote speaker's estimation effectively nonexistent never connotes speaker hopes occur. (It last "conditional my subsequent term.) "Intent" "[a] seeks accomplish through action." Black's Dictionary 810 (6th 1990). hardly "seek accomplish" ensue. 41 Court's division two categories, unconditional, makes seem logical. Aristotelian classification says about linguistic usage. Instead identifying readily three: feigned second category, third, conveyed alone. agreement, agreement say noun alone, qualification, "theoretically describe" phenomena false. Conditional embraced unmodified sea lion "lion." 42 categorical determination go Louisiana Christmas holidays, accurate "intend" Louisiana. And realize unlikely contingencies "acts God," example prevent me. (The always implicit expression accounts humorousness spelling expressions live long," Good Lord willing creek don't rise.") less precise, tolerable usage, which, virtually happen (such continuing live), reasonably likely happen, hope happen. might, plans receipt usual hoped-for end-of-year bonus. 43 indeed, unheard-of speak something, contingent certain, friend ill, "I funeral next week." one: week dies." carjacker met resistance same position: "intent resisted"; kill." No amount rationalization change reality (and far know exclusive) bear assigns. 44 contextual arguments respond. criminalizes accomplished "force violence" "intimidation." Requiring asserts, intimidation "implausibly small." 22. seems so. surely jumps passenger seat forces behind wheel drive gunpoint. modus operandi, planning secluded location. asserts hard imagine unconditional-intent-to-kill first provision apply, i.e., governing occurred. 23. saying exist, someone succeeds. 45 Notwithstanding ordinary "intent," possible, quite unusual, acquired law. claim falls short establishing "term-of-art" status. cites five (representing among minority jurisdictions question) satisfies requirement; acknowledges contrary. ante, 9, (citing (1982); (1972)); Craddock 204 606, So. 778 (1948); McArdle 372 897 (Ala. App.), writ S.2d 902 1979). understand position, former wrong, statutes, term art context, includes intent; depending question. option. convention give meaning. times. decide, line correct, rejects conditional-intent rule. 46 innumerable containing requirement, ranging steal, 2113 defeat Bankruptcy Code, §152(5), vessel hostilities against friendly nation, §962, obstruct lawful exercise parental rights, §1204. Consider, 841 drugs distribute them. Possession alone lesser one, §844. Suppose acquires small quantity cocaine own use, consumes entirely himself. further drug, wife worry expense because, emergency need money, resell it. suffices, person, sold "intended" sell sense, possession distribute. Or 2390 enlist serve hostility States." Canadian enlists army intending, fight Canada's wars, (though expects it) war States. criminally liable. These examples clear, doctrine cannot applied across-the-board code. am unaware equivalent absurdities mean supported single centuries jurisprudence, applying where absurd require real intent).1 selected sometimes sift many one-by-one, making basis ephemeral indications "congressional purpose" now turn. 47 Ultimately, rests deterring supports statement, premise conclusion, unusually uninformative (to stand respect realm accomplishment) generally strengthening punishing severely. 7, achieve policy objectives, specified. Limitations employed goal "purpose" itself. Director, Office Workers' Compensation Programs Newport News Shipbuilding Dry Dock Co., 514 122, 135 Under analysis, found. Such reasoning limitless illogical. 48 confidently "petitioner's prohibit." best "obviously intended" intuition, enacted, (not intent) Is implausible define narrow crime? Not all. era passed publicized instances do); perpetrators senselessly harmed owners crime. whose father killed, mother nearly incident already over. direct particularly savage killing part crime.2 49 much focused ineffable reads sending juries wander "would-a, could-a, should-a" land. difficult determine infinitely planned hoped himself come focus upon. often accomplice's convenient confirmation present Presumably ("Your life") word. system justice arbitrary Had cast net broadly, achieved eliminated arbitrariness "carjacking injury." here, plausible 50 sum, unambiguous obtain inflicting covered. Even ambiguity existed, resolved favor. Wiltberger, Wheat. 76, (1820). Government's "has primary application legislature appear innocent," added), carefully crafted conceal situations this. 169 (1958), officer deadly weapon. defendant, fired shotgun blast wounded officers, two, assaults. joined eight Justices reached merits case: 51 "This interpret increase places individual based intended. desires multiple affecting officer, clear. hold discharge §254." 178. 52 349 81 (1955), similar: transporting women, prostitution, trip, violations Mann Act. authored Frankfurter, said: 53 "When leaves Judiciary imputing undeclared will, favor lenity. sentimental consideration, want sympathy proscribing antisocial conduct. fairly presupposition doubts enforcement penal code imposition harsher punishment." 83. reduce historical curiosity. remains presupposition, undeniable favor, ambiguous benefit doubt. 56 before common-law developed themselves replicates includes, include, Rather, brand bears contradicts Since impossible longstanding, agreed-upon legal converted art, no. were doubtful. inadvisable introduce possibility "conditional-intent" modern criminal-law characterized plea bargaining, predictably terrorem effect. respectfully dissent. 57 Shaffer 308 F.2d 654 (CA5 1962), 373 939 (1963), upheld persons tried leave building minutes departure "he heads off," F.2d, 655. parlance, six 15, inapposite succeed demonstrating weakness assertion Richardson, Cas. 798 (No. 16,155) (CCDC 1837), Myers, 15,845) 1806), involve convictions simple contain dictum bearing Arrellano, 812 1209, 1212, (CA9 1987), contains dictum, since sort. fourth, Marks, M. (Ct. Mil. 1989), involved set material assertedly believed flame resistant. convicted of, aggravated arson, was, specifically crime," id., Dworken, 855 (CA1 1988), Anello, 765 (CA1), 474 996 (1985), conspiracy Defendants conspired-for transaction quality (and, price well) satisfactory. conspire specific-intent itself, insofar antecedent concerned. event, conspirators inadequate, 58 Note discussing enacting necessarily one. search represent "scrivener's error" Green Bock Laundry Machine 490 504, 528 529 (1989) (Scalia, concurring judgment); X-Citement Video, Inc., 64, 82 dissenting). correction here; reads, unamended total sense. speculate reason drafted it, select attribution hypothesized. Like 158 1996), Third 482 (1997), suspect inadvertently expanded 2119(3), imposed ensure constitutionality provision. draftsmen irrelevant; governed enacted. Thomas, 59 60 61 62 63 accept majority's central difficulty silent word, Title unlike codes, lacks Del. Ann., Tit. 11, §254 (1995); Haw. Rev. §702 209 (1993); Pa. Cons. §302(f) notes, 10, authority demonstrate tradition. Absent settled tradition, presumed reasons, agree Scalia and, therefore,

Category: 0