Document: 536 U.S. 545 HARRISv.UNITED STATES. No. 00-10666. Supreme Court of the United States. Argued March 25, 2002. Decided June 24, CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR FOURTH CIRCUIT Petitioner, who sold illegal narcotics at his pawnshop with an unconcealed semiautomatic pistol side, was arrested for violating, inter alia, 18 U. S. C. § 924(c)(1)(A), which provides in relevant part that a person relation to drug trafficking crime uses or carries firearm "shall, addition punishment provided such crime," "(i) be sentenced term imprisonment not less than 5 years; (ii) if is brandished, ... 7 and (iii) discharged, 10 years." Because Government proceeded on assumption provision defines single brandishing sentencing factor found by judge following trial, indictment said nothing about subsection (ii), simply alleging elements from principal paragraph. Petitioner convicted. When presentence report recommended he receive 7-year minimum sentence, objected, arguing element separate statutory offense indicted At hearing, District overruled objection, had brandished gun, him seven years prison. Affirming, Fourth Circuit rejected petitioner's argument McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 79, foreclosed factor, statute unconstitutional under Apprendi New Jersey, 530 466. In Apprendi, this held other fact prior conviction, any increases penalty beyond prescribed maximum is, effect, crime, must submitted jury, proved reasonable doubt (and, federal prosecutions, alleged handed down grand jury). But 14 earlier, sustained increased though maximum, when defendant possessed firearm. Held: The judgment affirmed. 243 F. 3d 806, JUSTICE KENNEDY delivered opinion respect Parts I, II, IV, concluding: 1. As matter interpretation, 924(c)(1)(A) offense, discharging are factors judge, jury. Pp. 552-556. (a) prohibition's structure suggests factors. Federal laws usually list all sentence into subsections. Castillo States, 120, 125. instant statute's lengthy paragraph lists complete crime. Toward end word "shall," often divides offense-defining provisions sentence-specifying ones. Jones 526 227, 233. And "shall" subsections, explain how defendants "be sentenced." Thus can presume its subsections identify 552-553. (b) illustrates, text might provide evidence contrary, but critical textual clues here reinforce single-offense interpretation. Brandishing has been singled out as paradigmatic Castillo, supra, 126. Under Sentencing Guidelines, moreover, affect sentences numerous crimes. incremental changes issue precisely what one would expect see meant matters judge's consideration. 553-554. (c) canon constitutional avoidance — susceptible two constructions, adopt avoids grave doubtful questions plays no role here. principle petitioner says interpretation violate increasing accorded safeguards assigned McMillan. Petitioner's suggestion used avoid overruling Court's own precedents novel and, given place enacted, unsound. Congress have reason believe it approaching line instruction gave 554-556. 2. Reaffirming employing approach outlined opinion, concludes 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) constitutional. Basing 2-year increase defendant's judicial finding does evade Fifth Sixth Amendments' requirements. dictated precise weight traditional factor. McMillan, 89-90. 568-569. KENNEDY, joined CHIEF JUSTICE, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, concluded Part III remains sound authority after Apprendi. will overrule precedent absent special justification. justification offered cannot reconciled. Those decisions consistent, however, because there fundamental distinction between factual findings those cases. extending authorized jury's verdict considered aggravated Framers Bill Rights. That mandatory (but maximum), impose without finding. This sort more like facts judges traditionally exercising their discretion choose within range Constitution require indictment, doubt. Read together, mean setting outer limits power it, purposes analysis. Within verdict, political system may channel rely upon expertise requiring serve terms make certain findings. Legislatures relied McMillan's holding, overturn these statutes cast uncertainty imposed them. 556-568. BREYER although 466, easily distinguished case logic, Amendment permits apply whether lead (as Apprendi) application here). suggest approval policy. Mandatory fundamentally inconsistent Congress' simultaneous effort create fair, honest, rational through use Guidelines. They transfer prosecutors, determine charges they decide bring, thereby reintroduced much disparity created Guidelines eliminate. Applying not, abolish, modify, statutes; take determination, while giving juries, prosecutors. legal consequences also seriously adverse, doing so diminish further otherwise broad define crimes specification elements, shape criminal factors, limit applying particular 569-572. J., announced REHNQUIST, BREYER, JJ., joined, III, O'CONNOR joined. filed concurring post, p. 569. judgment, THOMAS, dissenting STEVENS, SOUTER, GINSBURG, 572. William Ingram, appointment Court, 534 1160, argued cause petitioner. With briefs were Louis Allen Elizabeth A. Flagg, Jeffrey T. Green. Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben brief Olson, Assistant Attorney Chertoff, Matthew D. Roberts, Nina Goodman.* SCALIA join. 1 Once we consider law drawn influence sentence. essential guarantees attach facts. "[n]o shall answer capital, infamous unless presentment Grand Jury" Const., Amdt. 5; Hamling 418 87, 117 (1974). "In prosecutions," state federal, "the accused enjoy right trial impartial jury," 6; Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 149 (1968), government prove each doubt, re Winship, 397 358, 364 (1970). 2 Yet affecting elements. After convicted, statute, basing various relating manner committed. Though substantial impact thus subject Constitution's proof Some direct give specific choosing do facts, sometimes referred established 3 legislatures imposes some limitations well. For did could requirements labeling almost every described limitation Terms ago 490 (2000): "Other maximum," calls "must doubt." Fourteen before, 79 (1986), declined restrictive rule. found, preponderance evidence, 4 question before us stands * Joseph Harris side. He later violating firearms laws, including 924(c)(1)(A). part: 6 "[A]ny who, during violence firearm, furtherance possesses shall, "(ii) 8 "(iii) 9 trial. made reference (ii). Instead, paragraph: "during "knowingly carr[ied] firearm." bench States Middle North Carolina guilty charged. Following gun. citing decision 227 (1999), that, tried. hearing 11 Appeals again pressed argument. added matter, light even though, acknowledged, alter exposed. Rejecting arguments, 806 (2001). Like addressed question, makes Id., 812; accord, Barton, 257 433, 443 (CA5 2001); Carlson, 217 986, 989 (CA8 2000); Pounds, 230 1317, 1319 (CA11 2000). court 3d, 809. 12 We granted certiorari, 1064 (2001), now affirm. II 13 first threshold construction: Did 924(c)(1)(A)? Government's view considerations judge. hand, contends three different Subsection says, creates element. If correct, neither nor tried apply. So begin our analysis asking means. say many words prohibition latter. "in sentence" "into subsections." 125 (2000). Here, begins listing basic using carrying gun to" violent offense. 124. `shall,' specify sentences." Jones, S., (i) sets catch-all "certainly adds element." Ibid. Subsections (iii), turn, present, repeat 15 structure, "has look suggesting numbered only provisions," id., 232, compelling contrary. illustrated carjacking similar interpreted multiple offenses. 16 case, implied structure. Tradition past congressional practice, example, perhaps most important guideposts Jones. serious bodily injury statutes, modeled; doubted isolated instance. 235-237; 126-127; Almendarez-Torres 523 224, (1998). contrast, tradition treating factor: "Traditional involve features carried (e. g., gun)." See, e. Commission, Manual §§ 2A2.2(b)(2), 2B3.1(b)(2), 2B3.2(b)(3)(A), 2E2.1(b)(1), 2L1.1(b)(4) (Nov. 2001). Indeed, appear antecedents provision. "brandished" save until 1998, amended current form. then, describing, do, "special which" "basic crime" out. It seems likely same function 17 inference altered associated instructive. There great significance "steeply higher penalties" enhanced years, 25 life enhancements contingent factfinding. 233; 131; Almendarez-Torres, 235-236. now, effect consistent understandings operate; required constrain, rather extend, discretion. Section authorize penalties once found. Since minimum, well excess 7, Nothing history rebuts presumption Against point, invokes avoidance. doctrine, "a arise avoided, duty latter." ex rel. Delaware & Hudson Co., 213 366, 408 (1909). least open contends, Amendments To resolving (and possibly invalidating statute), urges, should read making 19 played implicated resolved favor See 243, n. ("[A]ny (other conviction) charged proven doubt"). play applies concerns constitutionality, Reno Flores, 507 292, 314, (1993), proposed rule requires acknowledges argues recent developments viability. deciding overruled, construe problem statute. 20 rests "respect Congress, assume legislates limitations." Rust Sullivan, 500 173, 191 (1991). passed controlling instruction, instruction. canon's goal eliminating friction coordinate branch, alleviated premise supplied adopting strained reading enacted reliance premise. stretched continuing vitality, embrace dynamic thing yet another prevailing changed. decline approach. 21 poses obstacle interpretive circumstances point common direction, conclude regards 22 Confident just could, longer authority. Stare decisis "inexorable command," Burnet Coronado Oil Gas 285 393, 405 (1932) (Brandeis, dissenting), doctrine "of importance law," Welch Texas Dept. Highways Public Transp., 483 468, 494 (1987). Even cases, stare pronounced, justification." Arizona Rumsey, 467 203, 212 (1984). 23 offers which, reconciled Cf. Ring Arizona, 609 (overruling Walton 497 639 (1990), "Walton irreconcilable"). find convincing. explain, domain jury framed recognized, reserve type Constitution. 24 defining conduct task generally "left legislative branch," Patterson York, 432 197, 210 (1977), manipulate definition way relieves obligations charge submit 240-241; Mullaney Wilbur, 421 684, 699 (1975). asked types labeled legislature, nevertheless "traditional elements" intended 211, 12. stemmed historical doctrinal sentencing. mid-19th century produced general shift country "providing fixed-term providing permissible range." 481. exercise "an inquiry scope, largely unlimited either kind information [they] consider, source come." Tucker, 404 443, 446 (1972). recognized process taken consideration need Watts, 519 148, 156 (1997) (per curiam); Nichols 511 738, 747 (1994); Williams 337 241, 246 (1949). reiterated Jones: "It course, anyone today claim bearing jury; intention questioning resolution." 248. Judicial factfinding course selecting implicate jury-trial, reasonable-doubt components Amendments. 26 proposition, coupled practices, explains latter 20th century, legislatures, dissatisfied disparities among offenders, implemented measures regulating These systems maintained ranges uniform Payne Tennessee, 501 808, 820 One example reform, Pennsylvania Minimum Act, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. 9712 (1982), prison five committing conviction. 27 sustaining placed considerable similarity contemplate range. Given explained, former: 28 "Section alters committed calling penalty; operates solely court's already available visible possession `ups ante' raising plan.... Petitioners' `really' offenses being punished superficial appeal exposed them greater additional punishment, not." 87-88 (footnote omitted). 29 response Act evaded procedural guarantees, noted "simply took always courts bear factor." 30 reasoning still controls. become merely analysis, "State provides" "shall rise both stigma punishment." 103 (STEVENS, dissenting). Judges same, "[j]udges, necessary remind ourselves, State." 498 (SCALIA, concurring). stigmatizing punitive, judges; thought 31 conclusion questioned extensive showing maximum) have, treated score, lacking. Statutes changing product asserted control over Courts founding (whose views relevant, contemporaneous adoption Rights, 478-484) arose 501-518 (THOMAS, concurring)) King Klein, Essential Elements, 54 Vand. L. Rev. 1467, 1474-1477 clear record fall determined defined "fact[s] legally inflicted." Reese, 92 214, 232 (1876) (Clifford, dissenting) (citing J. Bishop, Law Criminal Procedure 81, 51 (2d ed. 1872)). formulation includes put "alte[r] penalty," include triggering minimum. finding; "essential" punishment. 32 firm ground, legislature condition authorities 19th confirm, never doubt: 33 "[W]ithin allowed, pronounces suffer influenced shown aggravation mitigation, covered allegations indictment. Where heaviest scale laid down, inflicted, interpose mercy inflict lighter grade, rights violated mention mitigating circumstances. aggravating spoken swell above acts against prisoner, interposed check permitted mercy. entirely punishing him." 85, 54. 34 came use, able predict face be; aware "heaviest punishment" Judges, uncharged "aggravating circumstances" "swell[ed] charged." supporting fit squarely description, legislature's choice entrust "competition... respective roles," 245, central concern 35 "swell provided," 54, functioned elemen[t]." convicted Jersey N. Ann. 2C:39-4(a), 2C:43-6(a)(2) (1995). enhancement "acted purpose intimidate individual group individuals race." 2C:44-3(e) (Supp. 2001-2002). 36 unconstitutional. "[O]ur cases area, rely," observed, confirmed identified 490. held, mind spoke "crimes" "criminal prosecutions" Amendments: A alleged, prosecution complete, included attached Any "fact exposes exceeding according reflected alone," concluded, 483, been, 479-481; 37 Apprendi's conclusions undermine McMillan's. comparable practice submitting extend holding all: 38 "We imposition severe itself." 487, 13. 39 490; opinions "alter congressionally exposed," 253 [was] guilty." 494, 19; 242 ("[T]he Winship [in McMillan] rose (by preponderance) felonies, fell prescribed"). 40 based suggest, understanding Facts said, State punishment: 41 "The was, law, tied American exercised single, conclusion: constrained Put simply, expose `elements' offense." 10. petit juries form "`strong two-fold barrier liberties people prerogative [government].'" 151 (quoting W. Blackstone, Commentaries Laws England 349 (T. Cooley 1899)). Absent authorization finding, warranting extended "authorized verdict." 494. "[T]hose allows," necessarily 499 43 finds crime; observed; below maximum. why, noted, "nothing impermissible taking offender imposing the"minimum committed." 87-88. instances "expose prescribed." Whether chosen guiding chooses range, seeking contradicting 44 argues, underlying equal force findings, far maximum; she lower 244-245. Why, asks, fairness standard? dispute finding's practical itself ensure "will get bargained promise "anything less" that. barriers fall. select specified persuade imposed. affects dramatically so, 45 foregoing, surprising insisted ("The [sentencing factor] appropriately describes circumstance, character, supports offense"); ("McMillan, recognizes Due Process Clause Fourteenth guarantee Sixth: [M]ay support potential severity variant crime?"); 256 ("[N]o perceiving determinative validation limited available, substantially sentence"). continue stand. allowing her restrained power, limiting choices quite maintain former be. 46 abandon late date. constituents dozens approved case. conditioned here, possessed, Ala. Code 13A-5-6(a)(4) Kan. 21-4618 (1995); Minn. 609.11 2002); 2C:43-6(c), 6(d) (1998); examples, victim 60 age, 9717(a) quantity drugs, Ill. Comp. Stat., ch. 730, 5/5-5-3(c)(2)(D) (2000); related defendant, Alaska 12.55.125(b) offender, Md. Code, Art. 27, 286 IV 47 issue, 924(c)(1)(A)(ii), 48 wisdom minimums, fail account unique offenders warrant lesser penalty. Brief Families Minimums Foundation Amicus Curiae 16; cf. 245 Penalties Justice System 26-34 (Aug. 1991)). criticisms sound, persist hold leave democratic processes. 49 50 ordered. Notes: Briefs ofamici curiae urging reversal Cato Institute et al. Stephen P. Halbrook; Peter Goldberger Mary Price. amici affirmance David Samson, Lisa Sarnoff Gochman, General, Attorneys jurisdictions follows: Bruce M. Botelho Alaska, Janet Napolitano Ken Salazar Colorado, Jane Brady Delaware, Robert Butterworth Florida, James E. Ryan Illinois, Carla Stovall Kansas, Richard Ieyoub Curran, Jr., Maryland, Thomas Reilly Massachusetts, Michael Moore Mississippi, Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon Missouri, Mike McGrath Montana, Don Stenberg Nebraska, Frankie Sue Del Papa Nevada, Betty Montgomery Ohio, Fisher Mark Barnett South Dakota, Paul G. Summers John Cornyn Texas, Shurtleff Utah, Sorrell Vermont, Elliot Davis Virgin Islands, Darrell V. McGraw, West Virginia; Legal Kent Scheidegger Charles Hobson. concurring. 52 bases (1999). regardless interpreted, 466 I dissented wrongly decided, easy reject arguments. assuming validity agree arguments unavailing. therefore join KENNEDY's entirety. 53 judgment. distinguish (2000), logic. reason, plurality's insofar distinction. time, minimums adverse practical, legal, consequences, accept extent holds minimums. 55 saying this, my During decades, proliferated number importance, judges, legislators, lawyers, commentators criticized negatively fair administration legislators alike. Remarks Chief H. Rehnquist, Nat. Symposium Drugs Violence America 9-11 (June 18, 1993); Kennedy, Hearings Subcommittee House Committee Appropriations, 103d Cong., 2d Sess., (Mar. 9, 1994) (mandatory "imprudent, unwise unjust mechanism sentencing"); Breyer, Revisited, Crim. (Spring 1999); Hatch, Role Sentencing: Sentences, Search Certain Effective System, Wake Forest 185, 192-196 (1993); Schulhofer, Rethinking Minimums, 199 Raeder, Correctional Policy Nonviolent Drug Offenders, 1, (Summer 1999) (noting Bar Association opposed since 1974). 56 Unlike Guideline sentences, deny depart downward, unusual call leniency. Melendez 518 132-133 (1996) (BREYER, part); Koon 95-96 (1996). rarely reflect achieve proportionality key demands punish "kingpin" "mule" differently. Comm'n, Special Report Congress: i-iv, 31-33 (1991) (Sentencing Report); 214-220. empirical study. 9-10; 198. encourage subterfuge, leading frequent downward departures (on random basis), comparatively ineffective means guaranteeing tough sentences. 53. 57 statutes. Rather, prosecutor charge, existence "factor," say, amount unlawful triggers claiming innocence arguing, mistaken identity, impossible simultaneously argue overstated amount. How, ask, "innocent" know anything matter? upshot enter stipulation amounts (if guilty). extent, viewed prism open, system, adverse. 58 context Doing discussed fully dissent. 555. reasons set forth there, opinions, 254 (1999) (KENNEDY, dissenting); 224 (1998), 59 consequently concur whom GINSBURG join, dissenting. 61 turned nonetheless mere protections attach. 808-812 62 conflicts recognized. 533 (O'CONNOR, misunderstanding rejection very principles animated ago. nadir involving rules implicating afforded defendants, reaffirm reverse Appeals. 63 distributing marijuana violation 841 pleaded disputed disagreed,1 having waived Although 924(c)(1)(A)(i) prison, brandished.2 sentencing, acknowledged "close question" "[t]he happened [that] [a gun] transaction." App. 231-232, 244-247. result years' 64 Relying affirmed Accordingly, allegation order triggered. 65 construes "defin[e] offense," ante, 556, similarly structured (1999).3 then discounts constitutionally irrelevant. view, gleans Apprendi: "`Other maximum,' `must doubt.'" Ante, 550 490). According plurality, practices exceed extension Such fine distinctions regard vital withstand close scrutiny. 66 "accused" rights, "to informed nature accusation," "held district wherein Amdts. 6. Also, Member disputes due constitute waived. turns seemingly simple constitutes "crime." 67 answered construction alone length original expansive: 68 "[I]f core whatever sort, conviction together larceny larceny. Similarly, creating grades crimes, No multifactor parsing attempted necessary. kind, degree, entitled Each entitlement (concurring opinion). 69 indisputably Without discharged becomes harsher, imprisonment. 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). severe, life. 924(c)(1)(A)(iii). Thus, ultimately beside deemed ("[F]acts offense"). 70 free decree, limits, 550. "`both punishment,'" 560 (plurality opinion) dissenting)), clear. society long link 478 ability certainty felony flowed invariable linkage crime"). deal sense: all, care murder, manslaughter, turn moral opprobrium attaches act? "`annexes degree punishment'" circumstances, exposing 480 Archbold, Pleading Evidence Cases (15th 1862)). 71 interferes "judgment statute." protect know, applicable 72 "If faces others, obvious loss liberty attaching heightened; follows moment deprived unquestionably attached." 484. B 73 truncates protection "facts, factors," "alleged doubt," 550, statutorily mandated 7-year, 5-year, change because, regardless, falls life, longest flawed ranges, varies upward "discharged" weapon. sense, heightens represents Consequently, trigger safeguards. 74 Actual bolster conclusion. ignores "carried" appears be, uniformly, invariably, years. typically, always, 2001 Datafile, USSCFY01, Table (illustrating persons violations 5, imprisonment). true theoretically eligible imprisonment.4 today, actually responsible fixing 75 seem abstract (of incarcerated). However, adopted plurality equally 924(c)(1) surely depending degrees severity. "brandishing" avoided clever drafting. 76 concerned minimum: prescribed, "by [an] `elemen[t]' raises floor ceiling prescribed. 77 20th-century phenomena. oral argument, directly dispositive Tr. Oral Arg. 47. previously suggested ends where innovation ingenuity begins. Looking rested (rather pedigree minimums), logical grounds differently felony, 478-479, absolute change, constituting notice, heightened standard exposure 78 "`applicability dependent case.'" 85 (1977)). logic new broke understanding" definition, "continued middle century." therefore, acknowledge changed significant way. recognizing "within it." discussed, 577-579, inherently flawed. called firmly limited, precept McMillan: namely, State's treat behavior resurrects principle, 559-560, 565, contrary adopts position dissent component prohibited transaction `fact crime' meaning Winship." 483-484. 80 Nor dictate outcome case; considerably weakened variety reasons. initial decided weakest. 608; Agostini Felton, 521 235 (1997). relationship traces roots back ago.5 Appeals, let retroactive effect. concedes, prospective application, 42. hard credence "[i]t abandon" "at date." 567. imperative fidelity beyond-a-reasonable-doubt 81 Finally, believed earlier coexist implications much: 82 several formulations gives announces today. First, endorses principle: `[I]t remove assessment doubt.' (emphasis added) 252-253 concurring)). Second, restated SCALIA's There, wrote: exposed.' added). alterations incumbent admit why action appropriate normal decisis." 83 268 ("[B]y terms, judge-administered provisions, altered"). yield decision's "underpinnings [have been] eroded, subsequent Court." Gaudin, 515 506, 84 Further incompatibility concurs entire "cannot distinction." 569 (opinion judgment). leaves minority embracing forms basis today's explicitly continues 86 "Conscious likelihood McMillan," "we reserve[d] day preclude reconsideration narrower holding." come, adherence infidelity values. Because, Members logically respectfully owned pawn shop routinely wore work; accepted Harris' ordinary wear selling small friends. 924(c) "unable draw [carried] legitimate purpose, illegitimate purpose." 163 zero sixmonths distribution charge. 2119 Indeed virtually instance 2K2.4, comment., 2001) (stating clearly guideline statute.... departure") schemes themselves phenomena fairly vintage genesis. Seeante, 558-559; (2000) concurring) ("In fact, began revolution regarding `crime.' Today's decision, sharp break past, marks return status quo ante Amendments").

Category: 0