Document: 447 U.S. 381 100 S.Ct. 2247 65 L.Ed.2d 205 Alphonse BIFULCO, Petitioner,v.UNITED STATES. No. 79-5010. Argued Feb. 27, 1980. Decided June 16, Syllabus Section 406 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act 1970 (Act) provides that "[a]ny person who attempts or conspires to commit any offense defined in this title is punishable by imprisonment fine both which may not exceed maximum punishment prescribed for offense, commission was object attempt conspiracy" (the "target offense"). Petitioner others were convicted violating § conspiring violate 401(a)(1) knowingly manufacturing, distributing, possessing a controlled substance. In accordance with provisions 401(b)(1)(B) prescribing penalties violations 401(a)(1), petitioner sentenced term imprisonment, fine, 5-year special parole be served upon completion imprisonment. The Court Appeals affirmed petitioner's conviction, thereafter he filed an action under 28 U.S.C. 2255 vacate his sentence, claiming sentence unlawful because does authorize imposition term. District held had been properly sentenced, affirmed. Held: even though sanction included within penalty provision target offense. Pp. 387-401. (a) A "plain meaning" interpretation "imprisonment" support position means incarceration plus made applicable offense's provisions. Moreover, structure read as whole supports conclusion defines types authorized conspirators—imprisonment, both—and sets limits on those sanctions through reference but incorporate parole. 388-390. (b) Nor Act's legislative history demonstrate Congress intended substantive offenses, conspiracies them, identical, thus authorizing terms conspiracy convictions. Instead, view authorizes two sanctions—fines imprisonment—and fixes amount each imposed 391-398. (c) reading include offenses cannot supported ground Congress' principal objective enacting provisions—to deter professional criminals from engaging drug trafficking profit—renders it unreasonable ascribe intent isolated while withholding sentencing tool conspiracies. comparison clearly did not, reveal coherent pattern based asserted justification escalated sanctions. since deals attempts, prescribes identical range both, surprising would provide less stringent than completed P. 398-399. 600 F.2d 407, reversed remanded. Steven Lloyd Barrett, New York City, petitioner. Harlon L. Dalton, respondent. Mr. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion Court. 1 issue presented case whether (Act), 84 Stat. 1265, 21 846,1 court impose defendant manufacture distribute 2 * provides: 3 "Any conspiracy. 4 at 401(a) Act, 841(a). That subsection reads: 5 "Except title, shall intentionally— 6 "(1) manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess substance; 7 "(2) create, counterfeit substance." 8 are set forth 401(b). fines, and, some instances, mandatory minimum permissible punishments varies depending nature substance involved, has previously 401(b)(1)(B).2 It states: 9 otherwise provided section 405 [which distribution minors], violates follows: 10 11 "In schedule I II narcotic III, such more years, $15,000, both. If commits violation after one prior convictions him paragraph, felony other III law United States relating drugs, marihuana, depressant stimulant substances, have become final, $30,000, Any imposing paragraph shall, absence least years addition if there imprisonment." 12 401(c) describes operation greater detail. 13 "A revoked its conditions violated. circumstances original increased period resulting new diminished time spent whose required serve all part remainder to, lieu of, law." 14 narrow, important, question 406, states "imprisonment both," where 15 indictment December 1976 Eastern York, Bifulco charged single count intentionally substantial quantities phencyclidine, This 406. jury found several codefendants guilty charged, 4-year $1,000, term.3 Second Circuit subsequently conviction unpublished order. 16 January 1979, petitioner, pursuant 2255, pro se motion sentence. He claimed dismissed complaint. App. 7. 17 On appeal, 407 (1979). per curiam opinion, followed Courts See v. Burman, 584 1354, 1356-1358 (CA4 1978), cert. denied, 439 1118, 99 1026, 59 77 (1979), Jacobson, 578 863, 867-868 (CA10), 932, 324, 58 327 (1978). also relied decision Dankert, 507 190 (CA5 1975), reached similar result respect closely analogous 1013 963 (proscribing import substance). 18 Shortly Circuit's case, Third opposite Mearns, 599 1296 (3rd Cir. 1979), aff'g 461 F.Supp. 641 (Del.1978) pending, 79-415. We granted certiorari, 444 897, 205, 62 133 resolve conflict among Appeals.4 19 Government recognizes, Brief 31, n. 26, our examination meaning must informed policy expressed "the rule lenity." past cases clear principle statutory construction applies only interpretations ambit criminal prohibitions, they impose. See, e. g., Batchelder, 442 114, 121, 2198, 2202, 60 755 (1979); Simpson States, 435 6, 14-15, 98 909, 913-914, 55 70 Court's Ladner 358 169, 178, 79 209, 214, 199 (1958), rule: "This lenity will interpret federal statute so increase places individual when can no guess what intended." Whalen 445 684, 695, 10, 1432, 1440,n. 63 715, (1980); U.S., 15, S.Ct., 914. 20 emphasized "touchstone" "is ambiguity." Lewis 55, 65, 915, 921, 198 (1980). Where manifested intention, we ambiguity order defeat intent. argues here uncertainty about whenever advancing argument, focuses language structure, history, motivating policies Act. examine these three factors turn. Language Several reviewing courts adopted specified necessarily "term imprisonment" appended. F.2d, 868. Thus, stated imprisonment," meant argument too persuasive, however, refers. Therefore, always As supervision prison term, functionally distinct incarceration. Finally, reflect functional dichotomy. 401(b)(1)(B), example, twice "in (Emphasis added.) agree, therefore, rejected plainly Jacquinto, 464 728, 729-730 (ED Pa.1979). 22 Faced obstacles, rely solely "imprisonment." asks take broader relationship between conclude viewed whole, creates inference incorporates contends "which conspiracy." While wholly without force, ignores immediately preceding words state both." added.)5 Petitioner's scheme proposes, plausible Government's. finds further whole. 23 sentences offenses. 405(a) 845(a), enhances distributing minor, 24 eighteen age twenty-one . (1) up 401(b), (2) first involving same schedule." supplied.)6 25 At least, separate enumeration confirms design adhere distinction "imprisonment, both" unique novel concept intend constitute element attempt.7 26 Further proof certain 401 405, 401(c), workings violated." supplied.) One said "imposed under" 405.8 B 27 Legislative history. Conceding draftsmanship enacted "explicit," 17, look beyond ambiguous statute, give "their fair accord manifest lawmakers." Brown, 333 18, 68 376, 380, 92 L.Ed. (1948). demonstrates identical. true narcotics legislation congruence conspiracies.9 feature bills introduced 1969 forerunners But unknown administration system justice, initial proposals.10 29 John Ingersoll, Director Bureau Narcotics Dangerous Drugs, testimony before Senate Subcommittee October 20, 1969. Legislation: Hearings S. 1895 et al. Investigate Juvenile Delinquency Committee Judiciary, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., 663, 676 (1969). Attorney General earlier sought approval input Department structures pending legislation, id., 255, Ingersoll alternative schemes Subcommittee's consideration.11 His comments concerning were, their entirety, 30 "Another requirement illicit structure. Just meaningful answer effective rehabilitation, certainly adequate supervisory followup release best interest society. 31 "Therefore, persons placed regardless incarcerated probated suspended. judges another protecting society dealing violator." Id., 676. 32 specify see 11, supra, bill eventually approved full Judiciary ambiguous. S.Rep. 91-613, pp. 116-118 bill, 3246, 2d Sess. (1970), §§ 501(c)(1) (2), mandated 401(b)(1)(A) (B).12 504 forerunner parole.13 33 Committee's section-by-section analysis 3246 noted 25, "endeavor only: "Section endeavors punished and/or offense." 26. specific amended sections response Ingersoll's testimony. For unexplained reasons, neglected make conforming change section. 22. wording analysis, seem indicate awareness 504, unlike subsections 501 parole, consisting fine." 34 knew doing dealt second subsequent Under doubly enhanced offenders defining quoted, 383-384. contained provision, 508(a), out repeat offenders. stated: 35 is, authorized, 501(c)(2) [the (B)], offender's impose, authorized." 119-120.14 36 think makes fairly evident recognized various 501, done generally.15 508(a) like reveals failure explicitly into alleged inadvertent, fact intentional. 37 during debates tends confirm conclusion. Senator Dodd, chairman, summarized 38 "Those selling heroin opium draw possible $25,000. schedules I, II, sales non-narcotics 'pep pills' like, exceeding $15,000. [minimum] above offenses." 116 Cong.Rec. 996 (1970). 39 Dodd mention context provisions; mentioned debates. 40 Given scant Government's position, place reliance events transpired House's consideration proposed 3246. H.R. 17463, subject hearings House Ways Means July 1970, substantially 501(c)(1), (c)(2), reprinted 61, 66. 41 appeared Means, testified Justice's firm submitted highlighted differences existing legislation. 210-211. described 501(c), noted: program, comparable laws now force convictions." 222. With bill's 42 endeavoring Upon 223. 43 passage explaining "that contemplated extent exception." 24. statement, explains merely pertinent define disavow theory conspiracy, amounts imposed. chart Department, appended specifically 17463 229. footnote "H.R. act proscribed [sic ] committing 230, 6. sum, find persuasive report Means. 44 conducted Interstate Foreign Commerce. latter issued Report 18583, additions revisions here, H.R.Rep. 91-1444, pt. U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News p. 4566. Like Report, appears recognize terms, fines. direct ancestor present Report's 45 H.R.Rep.No.91-1444, 50, 4617. grammatical lends obvious 46 conclusion, believe that, rather supporting intention convictions, view. hearings, debates, reports, attention drawn matter, Members Houses attached hand, every failed C 47 Motivating policy. strongly argues, finally, Act—to profit—"render[s] [Congress] major 28. contention unpersuasive reasons. 48 First, points out, 14-23; Reply 1-3, most serious measured length severity authorize, available E. 408 848 (continuing enterprise); 403 843 (registrants); 401(d) 841(d) (1976 ed., Supp. II) (piperidine offenses). objectives prove much. 49 Second, thrust engage presents great threat, one, community distribution. contexts, logic Iannelli 420 U. 770, 778, 95 1284, 1290, 616 (1975). From premise, desired harsh incorporated parole—the unlimited grave consequences attending revocation, judge conspirator. 50 What mention, attempts. forms inchoate crime participation unsuccessful small When penalizes well conspiracies, Indeed, pointed laws. 223.16 IV 51 investigation relevant considerations, yields likely slip pen, nor inartful draftsmanship, conscious irrational choice. Our reveals, complete unambiguous Of course, doubts remain, resolved lenity.17 intent, evidenced record left behind, clashes expectations, simple remedy—the insertion brief appropriate phrase, amendment, Congress, Court, enact produce seeks case. 52 judgment reversed, remanded instructions 53 ordered. 54 Chief BURGER, concurring. easy dissent formulates it—whether directors business [should] severely subordinates peddle poison"—none us difficulty decision. really issue. Rather, limited: do mean? try discern Congress. perform task beginning ordinary statute. compass reach perceive—or reasonable should perceive—is "sensible result"; taken word unless assume role revisers. Aaron SEC, 446 680, 1945, 64 611 TVA Hill, 437 153, 173, 2279, 2291, 57 117 56 Particularly badly strains judges. Busic 398, 1747, LaRocca (decided Busic). temptation limited judicial regard sensible thing great, takes slippery slope. duty, paraphrase Holmes conversation Judge Learned Hand, justice apply hope done. Spirit Liberty: Papers addresses Hand 306-307 (Dilliard ed. 1960). Not reluctance my underlies join opinion. STEVENS, whom WHITE REHNQUIST join, dissenting. Should poison? unlikely intended. Callanan 364 587, 593-594, 81 321, 325, 312. Since 4061 implies conspirator just offender, construe fortified total statement legislator suggesting purpose treat conspirators trade offenders.2 particularly important ante 391. 61 Because conveys quite different me, paused consider narrow larger seeking, respectfully dissent. Pub.L. 91-513, 1236-1296. sake simplicity, citations Statutes Large omitted. 1978, amendment here. 95-633, 201, 3774, 841(b)(1)(B) II). count, acquitted charges. (CA2 1979). parties error with, on, count. 4, 2; 2. Two Appeals, joined v, Sellers, 603 53, (CA8 Cantu 598 471, 472 addition, number appellate defendants considering authorized. lingered beneath surface Timmreck, 441 780, 2085, 634 lead opinions (in review) holding 728 Pa. Fassette 1245 (CD Cal.1978). Cf. Wells, 470 216 (SD Iowa 1979) (adopting Mearns rationale sentencing, 3, accessories conspiracy). dissent's "ordinary 406," post, 402, incomplete provision. 405(b) likewise treble enhancement minor. express detract implication. necessary deal chose mandate whereas imposes dispel fact, accommodated general adjacent explain specificity instance drafters "simply looked used inserted numbers 401(c)]." 26-27, although refer many words, 401. reject reasons text. "explanation" assumes carelessness probably unwarranted; following subparts C. 174, 176a, 176b (1964 ed.); 7237(a) ed.). 1895, 701-708 (1969), 2637, 501-508 Sess,. 69-77, 160-170 13743 14774, Part 1, Amendments—1970: 11701 Public Health Welfare Commerce, 17-20 setting 90-92. favored providing 92. No context. seems, inexact attributed current offense—a five 2-year 116. differed use "endeavor" "attempt," provided: endeavor 118. An Committees conduct Controlled Substances, Laws; 69 (1970) (hereinafter Hearings). passed House, 33625 discussed below. offender 7, supra. failing poison." Post, 402. cursory today disparity fears. 406's sole apprehended organized operations. nothing prevents prosecuting operators network, either principals aiders abettors, distribution, possession 841. significantly, large operations mind. especially severe. 409(e)(2) (3) 849(e)(2) (defining offender). might quarrel aware extremely difficult accept unambiguously contrary result, perhaps mentioned, let alone applied, lower accepted position. cited accompanying dissenting appear fare little better score. 846. Surely ante, 399, cuts way, common American Law Institute, Model Penal Code 5.05(1) (Prop. Off. Draft 1962), part: Section, attempt, solicitation crimes grade degree attempted solicited

Category: 0