Legal Document

522 U.S. 93118 S.Ct. 488139 L.Ed.2d 450 John HUDSON, Larry Baresel, and Jack Butler Rackley, Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 96-976. Supreme Court of the United States Argued Oct. 8, 1997. Decided Dec. 10, Syllabus * The Office Comptroller Currency (OCC) imposed monetary penalties occupational debarment on petitioners for violating 12 U.S.C. §§84(a)(1) 375b by causing two banks in which they were officials to make certain loans a manner that unlawfully allowed petitioner Hudson receive loans' benefit. When Government later criminally indicted essentially same conduct, moved dismiss under Double Jeopardy Clause Fifth Amendment. District ultimately dismissed indictments, but Appeals reversed, relying v. Halper, 490 435, 448-449, 109 1892, 1901-1902, 104 487. Held: is not bar petitioners' criminal prosecution because OCC administrative proceedings civil, criminal. Pp. ___-___. (a) protects only against imposition multiple punishments offense. See, e.g., Helvering Mitchell, 303 391, 399, 58 630, 633, 82 L.Ed. 917. Halper deviated from this Court's longstanding double jeopardy doctrine key respects. First, it bypassed traditional threshold question whether legislature intended particular successive punishment be "civil'' or "criminal'' nature, see, Ward, 448 242, 248, 100 2636, 2641, 65 742, focusing instead sanction was so grossly disproportionate harm caused as constitute "punishment.'' thereby elevated dispositive status one factors listed Kennedy Mendoza-Martinez, 372 144, 168-169, 83 554, 567-568, 9 644, determining statute civil punitive transform into penalty, even though itself emphasized no factor should considered controlling, id., at 169, S.Ct., 567. Second, "assess[ed] character actual sanctions imposed,'' U.S., 447, 1901, rather than, demanded, evaluating "statute its face'' determine provided what amounted sanction, Such deviations ill considered. Halper's test has proved unworkable, creating confusion attempting distinguish between "punitive'' "nonpunitive'' penalties. Moreover, some ills directed are addressed other constitutional provisions. Thus, largely disavows method analysis reaffirms previous rule exemplified Ward. (b) Applying principles facts, clear would violate jeopardy. money statutes' express designation their "civil,'' see §§93(b)(1) 504(a), fact authority issue orders conferred upon "appropriate Federal banking agenc[ies],'' §§1818(e)(1)-(3), establish Congress these nature. there little evidence-much less "clearest proof'' requires, 249, 2641-2642-to suggest form effect render them despite Congress' contrary intent, Ursery, 518 267, ----, 116 2135, 2148, 135 549. Neither historically been viewed punishment, Helvering, supra, n. 2, 400, 633 neither involves an affirmative disability restraint, Flemming Nestor, 363 603, 617, 80 1367, 1376, 4 1435. comes play "only'' finding scienter, Kennedy, 168, 567, since may assessed §§93(b) 504, §1818(e)(1)(C)(ii), without regard violator's willfulness. That conduct also criminal, ibid., insufficient punitive, 2148-2149, particularly context, Dixon, 509 688, 704, 113 2849, 2860, 125 556. Finally, although both will deter others emulating mere presence goal deterrence "may serve well goals,'' 2149. 92 F.3d 1026, affirmed. REHNQUIST, C.J., delivered opinion Court, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, THOMAS, JJ., joined. J., filed concurring opinion, STEVENS, SOUTER, opinions judgment. BREYER, judgment, GINSBURG, Bernard J. Rothbaum, Oklahoma City, OK, petitioners. Michael R. Dreeben, Washington, DC, respondent. Chief Justice REHNQUIST Court. 1 administratively violation federal statutes, conduct. We hold Amendment Our reasons holding large part disavow used 448, 487 (1989), reaffirm previously established 248-249, 2641-2642, 742 (1980). 2 During early mid-1980's, chairman controlling shareholder First National Bank Tipton (Tipton) Hammon (Hammon).1 period, Rackley president member board directors Hammon, Baresel Hammon. 3 An examination led conclude had bank positions arrange series third parties, various statutes regulations. According OCC, those loans, while nominally made reality order enable him redeem stock he pledged collateral defaulted loans. On February 13, 1989, issued "Notice Assessment Civil Money Penalty.'' notice alleged violated (1982) CFR §§31.2(b) 215.4(b) (1986) with associated nominee borrowers benefit App. Pet. Cert. 89a. illegal resulted losses almost $900,000 contributed failure banks. Id., 97a. However, contained allegation any result "After taking account size financial resources good faith [petitioners], gravity violations, history violations matters justice require, required §§93(b)(2) 504(b),'' $100,000 $50,000 each Baresel. August 31, Intention Prohibit Further Participation'' petitioner. 99a. These notices, premised identical allegations formed basis informed further participation "any insured depository institution.'' 100a. 5 In October resolved entering "Stipulation Consent Order.'' consent Hudson, pay assessments $16,500, $15,000, $12,500 respectively. 130a, 140a, 135a. addition, agreed "participate manner'' affairs institution written authorization all relevant regulatory agencies.2 131a, 141a, 136a. 6 1992, Western 22-count indictment charges conspiracy, 18 §371, misapplication funds, §§656 making false entries, §1005.3 charged rested lending transactions prior actions brought OCC. Petitioners grounds, denied motions. affirmed nonparticipation issue, vacated remanded issue. 14 536 (C.A.10 1994). remand granted motion indictments. This time appealed, reversed. 1026 1996). court held, following fines disproportional proven damages "punishment'' purposes. certiorari, 520 117 1425, 137 534 (1997), concerns about wide variety novel claims spawned wake Halper.4 now affirm, different reasons. 7 provides "person [shall] subject offence twice put life limb.'' have long recognized does prohibit additional could, ""in common parlance,''' described punishment. ex rel. Marcus Hess, 317 537, 549, 63 379, 387, 87 443 (1943) (quoting Moore Illinois, How. 19, 306 (1852)). offense, 917 (1938); 548-549, 386-387 ("Only'' "criminal punishment'' "subject[s] defendant "jeopardy' within mean-ing''); Breed Jones, 421 519, 528, 95 1779, 1785, 44 346 (1975) ("In sense, describes risk traditionally prosecution''), then when such occurs proceedings, Missouri Hunter, 459 359, 366, 103 673, 678, 74 535 (1983). 8 Whether is, least initially, matter statutory construction. 633. A must first ask legislature, "in establishing penalizing mechanism, indicated either expressly impliedly preference label other.'' 2641. Even cases where "has intention we inquired scheme purpose effect,'' "transfor[m] clearly remedy penalty,'' Rex Trailer Co. States, 350 148, 154, 76 219, 222, 149 (1956). latter determination, 644 (1963), provide useful guideposts, including: (1) " [w]hether restraint''; (2) "whether regarded punishment''; (3) scienter''; (4) operation promote aims punishment-retribution deterrence''; (5) behavior applies already crime''; (6) alternative rationally connected assignable it''; (7) appears excessive relation assigned.'' It important note, however, "these face,'' id. 568, "only clearest suffice override legislative intent denominated 2641-2642 (internal quotation marks omitted). 10 marked applied case, Irwin convicted of, inter alia, statute, §287, based his submission inflated Medicare overcharged $9. He sentenced years' imprisonment fined $5,000. action False Claims Act, 31 §§3729-3731 (1982 ed., Supp. II). remedial provisions Act rendered "liable penalty $2,000, amount equal times sustains act person, costs action.'' §3729. Given separate appeared liable $130,000, actually defrauded than $600. concluded magnitude light conviction. While explicitly recognizing provision "was punishment,'' nonetheless application full second Clause. 438-439, 1896-1897. 11 direct appeal, As saw it, kind constraints, constituted depended primarily served "goals namely "retribution deterrence.'' 1902. Any "overwhelmingly disproportionate'' injury could "fairly said solely [the] purpose'' compensating government loss, thought explainable "serving retributive deterrent purposes.'' See 1902 (emphasis added). our question: Instead, focused regardless doing, single factor-whether nonpunitive purposes-to status. But itself, often point differing directions.'' 568. significant departure decision "asses[s] 13 believe deviation considered.5 subsequent demonstrated, "punitive,'' thus strictures Clause, unworkable. effect. Department Revenue Mont. Kurth Ranch, 511 767, 777, 14, 114 1937, 1945, 128 767 (1994); 2145, 549 (1996).6 If "solely'' (i.e., entirely nondeterrent) avoid implicating beyond scope Under analysis, look "sanction imposed'' implicated. possible until proceeded through trial proceeding follows proceeding, approach flies face notion forbids "attempting punish criminally.'' noted Due Process Equal Protection Clauses protect individuals downright irrational. Williamson Lee Optical Okla., Inc., 348 483, 75 461, 99 563 (1955). Eighth fines, including forfeitures. Alexander 544, 2766, 441 (1993); Austin 602, 2801, 488 (1993). protection afforded extending protections heretofore more offset created 15 facts evident §§84 penalties, authorize respectively, "civil.'' authorizing contains language denominating think agenc[ies].'' §§1818(e)(1)-(3). agencies prima facie evidence sanction. 402, 634-635; Spector, 343 178, 72 591, 596-597, 96 863 (1952) (Jackson, dissenting) ("Administrative determinations liability deportation sustained considering exclusively consequences connotations''); Wong Wing 163 228, 235, 16 977, 980, 41 140 (1896) (holding quintessential "by judicial trial''). Turning stage Ward test, find evidence, much proof suggesting "so contrary.'' 2148. nor "revocation privilege voluntarily granted,'' debarment, "is characteristically free element.'' 2. Similarly, "the payment fixed variable sums [is a] ha[s] enforcable original revenue law 1789.'' 17 do involve "affirmative restraint,'' term normally understood. prohibited participating industry, "certainly nothing approaching "infamous punishment' imprisonment.'' 1435 (1960). Third, scienter. imposed, allow assessment person "who violates'' underlying state mind. "Good faith'' §93(b)(2), can absence bad faith. "good case irrelevant, "willful'' disregard "for safety soundness [an] institution,'' willfulness prerequisite debarment; sufficient "continuing.'' §1818(e)(1)(C)(ii). Fourth, (and indictments). 2149, 556 (1993) (rejecting "same-conduct'' purposes). 19 recognize goals.'' 2149; Bennis Michigan, 516 442, 452, 994, 1000, 134 68 (1996) (" [F]orfeiture . serves distinct purpose''). For example, here, future wrongdoing, stability industry. To renders purposes severely undermine Government's ability engage effective regulation institutions 20 sum, simply very showing, say therefore obstacle pending proceed. 21 judgment Tenth Circuit accordingly 22 Affirmed. 23 whom THOMAS joins, concurring. 24 I wholly agree conclusion ill-considered Ante, __-__. Indeed, absurdity trying force Montana tax (1994), prompted me focus multiple-punishments prong. 802-803, 1957-1958. evaluation prohibits prosecution, "put genie back bottle.'' 803-805, 1959. Today's uses somewhat bottle would, returning immediately -which acknowledged prohibition prosecutions. So requirement maintained, jurisprudence duplicates correct double-jeopardy law, harmless pre-Halper. Accordingly, am pleased concur. 25 26 maxim "hard law'' apply easy cases. shall explain, easily decided straightforward well-established precedent. disposition, anything Appeals, require reexamination central unanimous opinion. proper concern danger might interpreted too expansively appropriately incorrectly raised close difficult question. my most unwise use vehicle substitution open-ended attempt define concept portions trouble hesitation join 27 sentence extremely case. settled Blockburger 284 299, 52 180, (1932), implicated charge "essentially conduct'' punished. 696, Rutledge 517 292, 297 (1996). Unless "same offense'' first, here involved offenses arguably Blockburger. 28 Blockburger's "same-elements'' if element included other. 2855-2856. 1989 (1986). Each extensions credit exceeding limits made,1 did defraud entries records. 1992 §§371, 656, 1005 conspiracy willfully misapply funds entries; none limit exceeded. 29 raising claim easier decide one.2 II 30 ignores obvious affirming Appeals; explanation why reasoning supported rejection claim. Instead granting certiorari consider error Appeals' candidly acknowledges motivated "concerns Halper. '' __. seriously exaggerates significance concerns. Its list illustrating problem cites seven last years. __, 4. every cases, rejected ruling favorable "novel'' preliminary injunction entered postponing implementation New Jersey's novel, controversial "Megan's Law.'' E.B. Poritz, 914 F.Supp. 85 (D.N.J. 1996), Verniero, 119 1077 (C.A.3 1997). cited surely indicate need revisit 32 practical flaws warrant prompt adjustment jurisprudence. asserts unworkable permits remedial. Though consistent reading, statement narrower.3 Of greater importance, clarified point: 33 "Whether "cannot fairly purpose' inquiry radically employed whether, categorical matter, Yet nowhere purport sweeping change emphasizing repeatedly narrow decision.'' 34 Having just recently quite odd overbreadth sort emergency. 35 expresses wait before deciding violates absent followed sanctions. There doubt fine counts offense barred how minor sought proceeding. 36 identifies merely emphasize accuracy comment announced "a rare fixed-penalty subjects prolific small-gauge offender overwhelmingly caused.'' 449, III 37 Despite disagreement lame excuse writing gratuitous essay reaffirmation (1994). Both held Clause.4 Those holdings reconfirmed proposition cannot escape Clause's command, six decades. La Franca, 282 574-575, 51 278, 281, 551 (1931); 398-399, 632-633, (1938). enormous array disposal capable being persons bedrock principle finality. "The idea, deeply ingrained Anglo-American system jurisprudence, State power repeated attempts convict individual subjecting embarrassment, expense ordeal compelling live continuing anxiety insecurity .'' Green 355 184, 187, 78 221, 223, 199 (1957). However chooses recalibrate meaning purposes, still contemplated IV 38 Today, relies multi-factor definition identify situations punitive. reformulation affect outcome remains seen. Perhaps not, recommends consideration sanction's ""operation deterrence,''' ""whether [non-punitive] assigned.''' __-__ 568). awfully similar told never themselves dispositive, ante, tipping balance extreme changing approaches midstream, refining incremental basis, lower courts unduly influenced new attitude, specific prescribed test. 39 course, appropriate perform lawmaking function necessary incident Article responsibility "Cases'' "Controversies.'' desire reshape legitimate issuing amounts advisory that, best, precedential value pure dictum restrict "It habit questions nature unless absolutely case.'' Burton 196 283, 295, 243, 245, 49 482 (1905); Ashwander TVA, 288, 345-348, 56 466, 482-484, 688 (1936) (Brandeis, concurring). concur affirmance, 40 notes, statements standards identifying needed revision, sense employing criteria up Sixth Amendments. One Assortment 89 Firearms, 465 354, 362-366, 1099, 1104-1107, 79 361 (1984); (1980); (1963); 254, 2644 [I]t anomalous [the statute] Self-Incrimination purposes''). 42 Kennedy-Ward leads directly JUSTICE STEVENS fifth criterion calls penalty] crime.'' efficient starting constitutionally "behavior,'' objection same-elements originally stated (1932). shows permissible assumption necessarily settled. explains. __ (STEVENS, judgment). criteria, therefore, stop stops. 43 My acceptance analytical caveats, however. points out, once understood treated character, (and, like reasons, Amendment) proportions. grounded using phrase impose substantial burden anyone claiming apparently truth enough "clearest'' dependent relied adopting standard (1960), quoted describe persuasion demonstrate unsupported "objective manifestations'' intent. 1376. 222-223, (1956), secondary authority, show "measure recovery'' "unreasonable excessive'' "what [would as] penalty.'' Lot Emerald Cut Stones 409 232, 237, 93 489, 493, 438 (1972), exemplifying liquidated penalty. read requisite then, strength countervailing indications (including presumption constitutionality enjoyed ostensibly safeguards guaranteed defendants. Flemming, 1376). add caution, wary reading guarantee demonstration likely past. 1902, (1989) ("What announce case''). elsewhere expanding forfeitures exigencies current drug problems, 2153 dissenting part) recent years, legislatures armed enforcement authorities powers forfeit property vastly exceeded tools''); James Daniel Good Real Property, 510 43, 81-82, 492, 515-516, 126 (THOMAS, part), development doubtless spurred increasingly inviting prospect profit Government. 56, 502 (opinion Court) (describing government's stake forfeiture); (citing Harmelin 501 957, 978, 9, 111 2680, 2693 115 836 (1991) J.) "it makes scrutinize governmental closely stands benefit''). Hence, infrequency proof,'' repetitive. 45 GINSBURG 46 majority SOUTER guidance distinguishing non-criminal proceedings. (1980), set forth approach. 47 disagree unlike ""only proof''' "transform'' "civil remedy.'' understand taken earlier 2641-2642. limitation suggests done. Rather, theory, hand. collection possession storage drugs functional equivalent prosecution'' because, among things, "remarkably high''; "an purpose''; "conditioned commission "exacted after taxpayer ha[d] arrested precise gives rise obligation''; equally increasing activity; departed "normal laws'' taxing contraband goods perhaps destroyed imposed. 781-784, 1946-1948. tracks non-exclusive believe, consequently misleading, consign legal limbo rests. 48 evaluate ""on face,''' 568), "assessing imposed.'' 1901; ordinary civil-fine "double jeopardy'' problem. unanimously, penalty'' was, circumstances, 439, 1896-1897, 1903-1904 (finding $130,000 "sufficiently $585 loss plus approximately $16,000 expenses fraud jeopardy). reached "excessive fines.'' __; 558-559, 2775, U. S, (emphasizing case'' fine). said. And majority's today explains abandon aspect holding. Most criticism characterizing-by examining statute-the seems special circumstances. contrary. said, Nor, view, result. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions convenience reader. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 50 499. small towns western Oklahoma. Orders providing waiver right, power, representatives thereof, bring deemed appropriate.'' 133a, 143a, 138a. 536, 539 Only §1005. E.g., Zukas Hinson, 124 1407, (C.A.11 1997) (challenge FAA revocation commercial pilot's license violative jeopardy); Law'' Jones Securities Exchange Comm'n, 1173 (C.A.4 SEC Rice, 151 general military discharge Hatfield, 108 67 foreclosed contracting); Taylor Cisneros, 102 1334 1996) eviction federally subsidized housing guilty plea paraphernalia Galan, 639(C.A.5) prison disciplinary jeopardy), cert. denied, 519 179, 136 concurrence, criticizes us reexamining believes narrower grounds. personam Treasury, together sanctions, "punishment' Clause.'' i. question, conflict Courts Appeals. pass unnecessary so. F.3d, 1028, 3. 781, 1946-1947. -like 780-783, 1946-1948, concluding Montana's dangerous prosecution.'' rem 2138. upheld forfeitures, historical support implicate Title §84(a)(1) total national association borrower percent bank's unimpaired capital surplus. §375b officers insiders. challenge dicta Kansas Hendricks, 521 2072, 138 (1997). There, rejecting Kansas' Sexually Violent Predator added: outside context.'' 2086. statement, dictum, contradicts 704-705, 2860-2861, (1993), prosecution. 745-746, 2881-2882 (SOUTER, (explaining context). imagine reason here. who punished subjected extent characterized remedial, retribution.'' (1989). Other decisions limited _________, 2139-2140, (1996); 2085-2086 Otherwise, totally Ursery involuntary commitment Hendricks implemented via

Classification Label: 0