Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-5904_i4dk.pdf
Page Number: 1

(Slip Opinion) 

OCTOBER  TERM,  2020 

1 

Syllabus 

NOTE:  Where  it  is  feasible,  a  syllabus  (headnote)  will  be  released,  as  is 
being  done  in  connection  with  this  case,  at  the  time  the  opinion  is  issued. 
The  syllabus  constitutes  no  part  of  the  opinion  of  the  Court  but  has  been 
prepared  by  the  Reporter  of  Decisions  for  the  convenience  of  the  reader. 
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

Syllabus 

TERRY v. UNITED STATES 

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR 
THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

No. 20–5904.  Argued May 4, 2021—Decided June 14, 2021 

Petitioner Tarahrick Terry contends that he is eligible to receive a sen-
tence reduction for his 2008 crack cocaine conviction.  In 1986, Con-
gress  established  mandatory-minimum  penalties  for  certain  drug  of-
fenses.  That legislation defined three relevant penalties for possession
with intent to distribute cocaine.  The first two carried mandatory min-
imum  sentences  based  on  drug  quantity:  a  5-year  mandatory  mini-
mum  (triggered  by  either  5  grams  of  crack  cocaine  or  500  grams  of
powder cocaine) and a 10-year mandatory minimum (triggered by ei-
ther 50 grams of crack or 5 kilograms of powder).  100 Stat. 3207–2, 
3207–3.  The third penalty differed from the first two: it did not carry 
a mandatory minimum sentence, did not treat crack and powder co-
caine offenses differently, and did not depend on drug quantity.  Id., at 
3207–4.    Petitioner  was  subjected  to  this  third  penalty  when  he 
pleaded guilty in 2008 to possession with intent to distribute an un-
specified amount of crack.  The District Court determined that his of-
fense involved about 4 grams of crack. 

Two years later, Congress passed the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, which
increased the crack quantity thresholds from 5 grams to 28 for the 5-
year mandatory minimum and from 50 grams to 280 for the 10-year 
mandatory  minimum.    §2(a),  124  Stat.  2372.    But  Congress  did  not
make this change retroactive until 2018, when it enacted the First Step 
Act.  After that, Petitioner sought resentencing on the ground that he 
was convicted of a crack offense modified by the Fair Sentencing Act. 
The  District  Court  denied  his  motion,  and  the  Eleventh  Circuit  af-
firmed. 

Held: A crack offender is eligible for a sentence reduction under the First 
Step Act only if convicted of a crack offense that triggered a mandatory
minimum sentence.  The First Step Act makes an offender eligible for