Opinion ID: 504724
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Assimilative Crimes Act (ACA) and Sec. 3013

Text: 5 As part of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3013, which mandates that a special monetary assessment be imposed on convicted persons. Section 3013 states: 6 (a) The court shall assess on any person convicted of an offense against the United States-- 7 (1) in the case of a misdemeanor-- 8 (A) the amount of $25 if the defendant is an individual; and 9 (B) the amount of $100 if the defendant is a person other than an individual; and 10 (2) in the case of a felony-- 11 (A) the amount of $50 if the defendant is an individual; and 12 (B) the amount of $200 if the defendant is a person other than an individual. 13 (b) Such amount so assessed shall be collected in the manner that fines are collected in criminal cases. 14 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3013. In accordance with congressional intent, monies collected by way of the assessment are used to fund the Crime Victims Assistance Fund, whereby the federal government provides financial assistance to victims of crime through qualifying state victims assistance funds. 42 U.S.C. Secs. 10601(b)(2), 10602. See S.Rep. No. 497, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 1, reprinted in 1984 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad.News 3182, 3607. 15 The Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 13, provides: 16 Whoever within or upon any of the places now existing or hereafter reserved or acquired as provided in section 7 of this title, is guilty of any act or omission which, although not made punishable by any enactment of Congress, would be punishable if committed or omitted within the jurisdiction of the State, Territory, Possession, or District in which such place is situated, by the laws thereof in force at the time of such act or omission, shall be guilty of a like offense and subject to a like punishment. 17 (Emphasis added.) By enacting the ACA, Congress opted not to adopt a separate criminal code for federal enclaves; instead, Congress chose to conform the criminal law of federal enclaves with the criminal laws of the respective states in which the enclaves are situated except in cases of specific federal crimes. See United States v. Sharpnack, 355 U.S. 286, 293, 78 S.Ct. 291, 295-96, 2 L.Ed.2d 282 (1958); U.S. v. King, 824 F.2d 313, 315 (4th Cir.1987); United States v. Mayberry, 774 F.2d 1018, 1020 (10th Cir.1985). Essentially a gap-filling measure, the ACA supplements federal criminal law on federal enclaves by assimilating the entire substantive criminal law of the state wherein the federal enclave is located, including laws relating to the definition and scope of an offense and laws governing the manner in which an offense is to be punished. King, 824 F.2d at 315. 18 This Court has not yet addressed the interplay of Sec. 3013 and the ACA; the interrelationship of these two statutory schemes is squarely presented by the facts of this case. It is axiomatic that a violation of state law incorporated by the ACA into federal law is 'an offense against the United States.'  King, 824 F.2d at 315-316 (quoting United States v. Press Publishing Co., 219 U.S. 1, 10, 31 S.Ct. 212, 214, 55 L.Ed. 65 (1911)). See also United States v. Brown, 608 F.2d 551, 553 (5th Cir.1979) ([P]rosecution under ACA is not for enforcement of state law but for enforcement of federal law assimilating a state statute.). By its express terms, Sec. 3013 provides for a mandatory assessment on any person convicted of an offense against the United States. Therefore, as a general rule, the Sec. 3013 assessment applies to individuals convicted under the terms of the ACA. However, this general rule is subject to the overriding exception that individuals convicted under the ACA shall only be subject to a like punishment to that provided by assimilated state law. See Mayberry, 774 F.2d at 1020 ( [T]he like punishment language has consistently been construed to require punishment only in the way and to the extent that the same offense would have been punishable if the territory embraced by the federal reservation or enclave where the crime was committed remains subject to the jurisdiction of the state.). 19 In the instant case, the district court affirmed the magistrate's imposition of the assessment, concluding that the plain language of Sec. 3013 and the ACA dictated that a special mandatory assessment must be imposed on all individuals convicted of any federal offense; since a violation of the ACA is a federal offense, although assimilated by state law, individuals convicted under the ACA are subject to the assessment. Further, the district court concluded that Sec. 3013 does not prohibit the imposition of an additional punishment on those convicted of an assimilative crime. 20 We recognize that Congress, in December 1987, amended Sec. 3013 to make the federal assessment specifically applicable to all individuals convicted under the ACA, regardless of whether state law provides for a like punishment. However, since Davis was sentenced prior to the 1987 amendment, that amendment is not applicable in the instant case. 1 Thus, while we affirm the decision of the district court, we are not persuaded that defendants sentenced under the ACA prior to the 1987 congressional amendment are in all instances subject to the special assessment provisions of Sec. 3013. Rather, we conclude that Sec. 3013 assessments may not be imposed on individuals sentenced prior to the 1987 amendment unless the assimilated state law provides a like punishment. As Davis was sentenced prior to the effective date of the 1987 amendment, to determine if the monetary assessment imposed against Davis is valid, our inquiry becomes whether Davis would be subject to a like punishment under Texas law. In the instant case, a like punishment is a comparable assessment. 2