Document: 450 U.S. 333 101 S.Ct. 1137 67 L.Ed.2d 275 Thomas J. ALBERNAZ and Edward Rodriguez, Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 79-1709. Argued Jan. 19, 1981. Decided March 9, Syllabus Petitioners, who were involved in an agreement to import marihuana then distribute it domestically, convicted on separate counts of conspiracy marihuana, violation 21 U.S.C. § 963, 846. These statutes are parts different subchapters the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention Control Act 1970. Petitioners received consecutive sentences each count, length their combined exceeding maximum which could have been imposed either for a conviction or distribute. The Court Appeals affirmed convictions sentences. Held: 1. Congress intended permit imposition violations §§ 846 963 even though such arose from single having dual objectives. Pp. 336-343. (a) In determining whether authorize cumulative punishments, applicable rule, announced Blockburger v. United States, 284 299, 304, 52 180, 182, 76 L.Ed. 306, is that "where same act transaction constitutes two distinct statutory provisions, test be applied determine there offenses only one, provision requires proof fact other does not." provisions here specify ends as proscribed object "distribution" "importation"—and clearly satisfy test. Each not, thus proscribe can result Braverman 317 49, 63 99, 87 23 distinguished. 337-340. (b) While not controlling where clear indication contrary legislative intent, if anything assumed history's silence question drugs, was aware rule legislated with mind. And lenity has no application this case, since ambiguity. 340-343. 2. petitioners' violate Double Jeopardy Clause Fifth Amendment. punishments after unconstitutionally multiple, dispositive crimes. Where intended, did here, impose multiple Constitution. 343-344. 5th Cir., 612 F.2d 906, affirmed. Judith H. Mizner, Boston, Mass., petitioners. Mark I. Levy, Washington, D. C., respondent. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 (Count I), II), count. States Circuit, sitting en banc, 906 (1980). We granted certiorari consider these and, so, punishment violates Amendment 449 818, 69, 66 20 2 facts forming basis set forth panel Appeals, 585 1234, (5th 1978), need repeated detail here. For our purposes, we relate petitioners agreement, objectives domestically. charged under exceeded 5-year sentence 3 case part 1970, 84 Stat. 1236, 801 et seq. Section Subchapter I provides: 4 "Any person attempts conspires commit any offense defined subchapter punishable by imprisonment fine both may exceed prescribed offense, commission attempt conspiracy." 5 This proscribes I, including specifically prohibited 841(a)(1). authorizes penalty specified offense. 6 II Act, contains identical II, 960(a)(1). As 846, penalties Thus, conspiratorial envisages importation distribution punishment. 7 do dispute violated 963. Rather, contend involving conspiracy, isolated had argue because spoken clarity required find "unambiguous intent punishment," should invoke hold ambiguity issue prevents further authorized Congress, barred 8 resolving initial contention intend starting point must language statutes. Absent "clearly expressed intention contrary, ordinarily regarded conclusive." Consumers Product Safety Comm'n GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 102, 108, 100 2051, 2056, 64 766 Here, confront contained Subchapters Act. unambiguous face its terms. contend, however, presented facially ambiguous, but when those arise participation objectives—a raised, rather than resolved, existence provisions. 9 answer found, believe, 306 (1932), most recently last Term Whalen 445 684, 1432, 715 Whalen, explained "rule construction" stated used "to given situation provided punished cumulatively." U.S., at 691, S.Ct., 1437. referenced following Blockburger: 10 "The supra, 182. 11 Our decision first time looked cumulatively. previously Brown Ohio, 432 161, 166, 97 2221, 2225, 53 187 (1977), although analysis necessity based claim double jeopardy came us state court, "[t]he established sufficiently distinguishable States. . ." Similarly, Iannelli 420 770, 785, n. 17, 95 1284, 1293, 43 616 (1975), explained: 12 articulated serves generally similar function identifying congressional sanctions arising course transaction. might imposed, courts examine ascertain 'whether not.' Id., decisions applying principle reveal Court's focuses elements If satisfied, notwithstanding substantial overlap offered establish crimes." 13 Gore 357 386, 78 1280, 1405 (1958), rejected opportunity abandon apply several reaffirming Blockburger, 14 offender regulatory controls devised means dealing social evil deleterious difficult combat make identic." 389, 1282. 15 Finally, American Tobacco Co. 328 781, 1125, 90 1575 (1946), defendants restraint trade Sherman (15 1), monopolize 2), sought review contending impermissible "but one namely, fix prices." 788, 1128. rejecting claim, noted presence then, relying upheld ground "§§ require conspiracies reciprocally independent objects partially overlap." 1129. 16 seriously otherwise. Sections conspiracy—distribution opposed importation—and beyond peradventure "each [that] cumulatively results unequivocal determination like Tobacco, 17 conclusion regard inconsistent earlier (1942), rely so heavily. cannot divining Quoting Braverman, they objective many crimes, statute punishes. taken agreements hence one." 53, 101. support position. Unlike instant later objectives, statute. noted: 18 "Since continuing embraces criminal objects, differs successive acts penal See 301-[30]4, 181-182, 306; Albrecht 273 1, 11-12, 47 250, 253-254, 71 505. however diverse statute, 37 Criminal Code. violation, imposed." 54, 102. (emphasis added). 19 Later distinguished Braverman: "In contrast described [Braverman ] counts, all general offenses, stop short monopoly, content monopoly. One made Act." also Pinkerton 640, 642-643, 1180, 1181, 1489 (1946). 22 construction," discerning purpose where, example, intent. Nothing, history brought attention discloses presumption accorded fact, silent drugs. read "ambiguity" over punishment.1 much into nothing. expected address construction arise. But, noted, "predominantly lawyer's body," Callanan 364 587, 594, 81 321, 325, 312 (1961), appropriate assume elected representatives know law." Cannon University Chicago, 441 677, 696-697, 99 1946, 1957-1958, 60 560 (1979). result, point, It presume "Congress unaware what accomplished. Railroad Retirement Bd. Fritz, 179, 453, 461, 368 (1980).2 "ambiguous" punishment, allow situation. Last Bifulco 381, 2247, 65 205 (1980), recognized applies interpretations substantive ambit prohibitions, impose. Ladner 358 169, 178, 79 209, 214, 199 stated: " 'This policy will interpret federal increase places individual interpretation more guess intended.' 387, 2252. emphasized "touchstone" "is ambiguity." "Where manifested intention, manufacture order defeat intent." Ibid. Lenity aid ambiguity; beget one. comes operation "at end process construing expressed, beginning overriding consideration being lenient wrongdoers." 596, 326. 24 light principles, simply case; confronted To gives reason pause manner interpreted. 25 reach today regarding reinforced directed evils drug trafficking. "Importation" societal harms, observed, effect determined drugs them twice serious singly. F.2d, 918. surprising for, observed years ago, narcotics legislation country "reveals turn screw machinery—detection, prosecution punishment—tighter tighter." 390, 1283. 26 Having found argument Constitution precludes itself states shall "be subject put life limb," decisional law area veritable Sargasso Sea fail challenge intrepid judicial navigator. "protects against second acquittal. protects conviction. offense." North Carolina Pearce, 395 711, 717, 89 2072, 2076, 656 (1969) (footnotes omitted). 27 "the court defendant's upon charges resolved without Legislative Branch authorized." 688, 1436, id., 696, 1440 (WHITE, J., concurring judgment); ibid. (BLACKMUN, judgment). permissibility crime rape unintentional killing rape, "dispositive question" 689, 1436. "power define prescribe guilty them, resides wholly Congress." "[w]here trial, role constitutional guarantee limited assuring authorization imposing 165, 2225. constitutionally permissible imposed. Constitution.3 28 judgment accordingly 29 Affirmed. 30 STEWART, whom MARSHALL STEVENS join, judgment. 31 715, said 32 But far cry says today: "[T]he Constitution." Ante, 344. statements supported neither precedent nor reasoning unnecessary conclusion. 33 No matter how spoke, provide unless criterion 306. 34 Since created concur Both Government concede Brief 18-19 25. equals "ambiguity," alternative explanation enacted Committees House Representatives jurisdiction initially referred Committee Ways Means hearings, decided relating imports exports narcotic transferring remaining provisions—relating domestic regulation control—to Interstate Foreign Commerce Committee. background supports structure concern committee persuasively responds speculation noting unquestionably inasmuch evidences great deal coordination between Committees. incorporates basic standards makes numerous express references Subchapter. parallel structures represent change administration's proposal prior law. Moreover, Congressman Boggs, sponsor bill, introducing floor amendment Title III (Subchapter Act) "section 1013 [now 963]—relating conspiracies—. take comparable title [Subchapter encompassing, inter alia, 846]." 116 Cong.Rec. 33665 (1970). instances inconsistency Government's behavior finding absence appropriateness 1977 Department advised Attorneys counts. sheds regard. Petitioners' "same offense" purposes wrong. —the relied discussed, meet standard. well settled give rise violating Clause. See, e. g., Harris 359 560, 597 (1959); (1958). true "single transaction" conspiracy.

Category: 0