Legal Document

544 U.S. 13 SHEPARDv.UNITED STATES No. 03-9168. Supreme Court of United States. Argued November 8, 2004. Decided March 7, 2005. After petitioner Shepard pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession firearm violation 18 U. S. C. § 922(g)(1), the Government sought increase his sentence from 37-month maximum 15-year minimum that 924(e), popularly known as Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), mandates for such felons who have three prior convictions violent felonies or drug offenses. Shepard's predicate were Massachusetts burglary entered upon pleas. This has held only "generic burglary" — meaning, among other things, it was committed building enclosed space is crime under ACCA, Taylor v. States, 495 575, 599, and court sentencing ACCA can look statutory elements, charging documents, jury instructions determine whether an earlier conviction after trial generic States (like Massachusetts) with broader definitions, id., at 602. Refusing consider minimum, District found investigation did not show had rejected Government's argument should examine police reports complaint applications determining pleas admitted supported convictions. The First Circuit vacated, ruling be considered. On remand, again declined impose enhanced sentence. vacated. Held: judgment reversed, case remanded. 348 F. 3d 308, reversed JUSTICE SOUTER delivered opinion Court, except Part III, concluding enquiry plea nongeneric statute necessarily elements offense limited terms document, agreement transcript colloquy between judge defendant which confirmed factual basis plea, some comparable judicial record this information. Guilty may establish offenses, Taylor's reasoning controls identification following pleas, well on verdicts, nowhere provides tried cases regarded differently, nothing rationale limits then, must find right analogs applying cases. drew pragmatic conclusion about best way identify In without jury, closest would bench-trial judge's formal law finding fact; cases, they statement charge shown by written presented court, findings fact adopted entering plea. A later could generally tell material "necessarily" rested identifying generic. Taylor, supra, arguments wider evidentiary cast includes documents submitted lower courts even charges amount call ease away respect congressional intent avoidance collateral trials require confining evidence convicting court's records approaching certainty State. That heart decision, there no justification upsetting precedent where dealing interpretation Congress not, nearly 15 years since taken any action modify statute. Pp. 19-23, 26. SOUTER, joined STEVENS, SCALIA, GINSBURG, concluded III rule Jones 526 227, 243, n. 6, Apprendi New Jersey, 530 466, 490, line cases—that than sufficient raise limit possible federal absent waiver defendant—is also relevant sentencing. State, necessary established State when disputed made authority Almendarez-Torres 523 224. Instead, considering enhancement (on view) make what state understood plea's basis, dispute raises concern underlying Apprendi: Sixth Fourteenth Amendments guarantee jury's standing power essential potential sentence's ceiling. here too far removed conclusive significance record, much like subject Apprendi, say clearly authorizes resolve dispute. reading statutes avoid serious risks unconstitutionality therefore counsels scope factfinding character 24-26. THOMAS agreed broaden judges because give rise constitutional error, doubt. Both 224, permit concerns convictions, been eroded Court's subsequent Amendment jurisprudence. 26-29. J., opinion, III. JJ., full, THOMAS, filed concurring part judgment, post, p. O'CONNOR, dissenting KENNEDY BREYER, joined, 28. REHNQUIST, took decision case. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED COURT OF APPEALS FOR FIRST CIRCUIT. Linda J. Thompson, appointment 543 806, argued cause petitioner. With her briefs John M. Thompson Jeffrey T. Green. P. Elwood him brief Acting Solicitor General Clement, Assistant Attorney Wray, Deputy Dreeben.* 1 Title 924(e) (2000 ed. Supp. II), prison anyone possessing offenses felonies. makes felony if ("generic burglary"), boat motor vehicle. 575 (1990), we burglary. question admitted, for, We hold examining definition, agreement, colloquy, explicit assented. 2 * Petitioner Reginald indicted barring firearm, guilty. At claimed raised range 30 37 months (under Sentencing Guidelines) required pointing four one Massachusetts's two statutes.1 Whereas said each represented burglary, ruled barred counting predicates mandatory minimum. 125 2d 562, 569 (Mass. 2000). 3 read listing "burglary" "violent felony" (in ACCA) refer called burglary," "unlawful unprivileged entry into, remaining in, structure, commit crime." S., 599. Because define more broadly, extending entries into boats cars, how might offense.2 prohibits delving particular facts disclosed conviction, thus leaving normally "look definition offense." Id., recognized exception "categorical approach" "a narrow [in burglary] actually all of" offense. Ibid. applicable "if indictment information charged building, convict ...." Only then "nongeneric" qualify predicate. 4 case, complaints course narrowed limit. nonetheless urged issuance complaints, telling went burglaries notwithstanding descriptions tracked expansive law. forbade this, within failed accordingly refused though somewhat above standard level Guidelines, ground criminal history category Guidelines do justice ample record. 5 appeal Circuit, its Harris, 964 1234 (1992), vacated count "sufficiently reliable defendant's constitutes admission generically crime," 231 56, 67 (2000). As remanded government shared belief pleading 70. 6 supplemented submission additional Judge noted account occurred hearings came affidavit Shepard, stated "that none details th[e police] w[as] ever mentioned pleas," "the themselves never during colloquy," time "was he asked contained ... [r]eports true." 181 14, 19 2002). further swore "with report: [he] admit truth [r]eport [his] [had] alleged report 19-20 (internal quotation marks omitted). Based carry burden demonstrate burglaries. 7 Appeals observing "seriously disputed" break buildings described applications, 311 (CA1 2003), requisite sentence, 314. 8 granted certiorari, 542 918 (2004), address divergent decisions Courts stem verdicts. now reverse. II 9 agree (and every speak matter) non-generic See 3d, 312, (citing cases). wisely refrains challenging position, are differently. It drops hint contemplated different standards establishing turning Nothing effect suggested, all, language imposing categorical approach, refers conduct but "convictions" "element[s]" crimes. U.S., 600-601 U.S.C. 924(e)). Nor does Act's legislative reveal lesser preference categorical, distinct fact-specific, approach recognizing resolved 601. And certainly, practical difficulties unfairness daunting," ibid., less litigated Finally, convictions; our discussion inherent looking circumstances spoke specifically "cases guilty, which] often facts." Our job, 10 while respecting Congress's adoption criterion avoids enquiries conviction. identified referring recorded acts limiting category, giving instruction jury. 11 however, purport adequate strictly instructions, 602 (discussing use these "example"), follow alone rulings fact, charge, Fed. Rule Crim. Proc. 11(a)(3), plea.3 generic, 602, just support document sort 12 argues cast, going beyond used adjudicating guilt charges. local grounds issuing statute; alleges satisfy statute, suffice ACCA. There reason unavailable witnesses stale memories, points out, consistent "[t]he purpose [would be] same paper (which endorsed Taylor): nature convicted, rather did." Brief 22-23. stresses points. First, says accommodating view competent prove will yield conclusions. Although their notations "[a]dmit[ted] suff[icient] facts" structures, true admitting "can plausibly petitioner's building." 25. 14 Second, pulls little closer demand emphasizing instance free inconsistent, competing pivotal issue separating "[T]here indicate based ship vehicle occasions issue." 16. supports inclusive invoking virtue nationwide application unaffected idiosyncrasies recordkeeping bar review "hinge happenstance record-keeping practices vagaries prosecutors' practices." Opposition 16 point, position uncomfortable implication: pressed favor allows follows menace showing crime. If showed testimony break, verdict effect. felonious entrance anything odds turf accountant's dream. And, again, significant abbreviated disputed, followed stenographic notes thrown away. 17 amounts conclusion, confined But limitation cannot both. here. are, interpretation, see, e. g., claim adhere powerful once settled see Patterson McLean Credit Union, 491 164, 172-173 (1989) ("Considerations stare decisis special force area here, unlike context implicated, remains alter done"). instance, usual precedential force, having passed down, understanding allowed restricted statute.4 Developments Circuit's provide demanding requirement rest involved admitted) equating indeed, prescient problems allowing enquiry. "If conclude, own [who convicted statute] challenge abridging trial?" anticipated very imposed sake preserving right, absence rights defendant. (1999); 490 20 dismisses relevance Jones-Apprendi implementation describing determination apply "involv[ing] assessment itself already `required find' order guilty." 38 (quoting 602). simple. problem "what find'" debatable. 224 (1998). requires narrows limits, lies rulings, case) admissions accepted confirming valid silent element, fact. 21 state, ceiling While unconstitutionality, Jones, 239, us constrained implication verdict.5 IV 22 defined defendant, 23 proceedings. 24 so ordered. 25 CHIEF Notes: Gregory L. Poe, Roy Englert, Jr., Max Huffman, Pamela Harris National Association Defense Lawyers amicus curiae urging reversal. initially cited fifth failing obtain documentation focused AlthoughTaylor burglaries, does, holding covered 600. Several similar view, approving documentsUnited Bonat, 106 1472, 1476-1477 (CA9 1997); Maness, 1006, 1009-1010 (CA6 1994); Smith, 724, 733-734 (CA10 1993) (per curiam) (construing Commission, Manual 4B1.2 (Nov. 1990)). Like Government, dissent allow district approve today, proposal withTaylor Government's. clear narrowly implement object disputes. before it, convict." 602; ibid. (permitting "in burglary"). text, certainly those introduced "uncontradicted," 31 (opinion J.), "internally consistent," in. presumably examination assuredly not. reconcile dissent's verdicts grew out 36 ("Taylor set pleas"). suggestion referred Moreover, noted, 19, disputes, distinction. decline create distinction evidently desire draw, envision, hard explain. portend extension ofApprendi 466 (2000), proof move (if occur) "surely favors future defendants shoes." Post, 38. According dissent, bearing proving introduce trial, threaten severe prejudice up good prophesy, apprehensiveness now, turns reach further, feels risk high waive decide questions 26 judgment. 27 progeny prohibit "mak[ing] [a defendant's] lawfully reference defendant." Booker, 220, 317-318 (2005) (THOMAS, part). Yet Act, permits exposed 924(a)(2) Federal 30-to-37 months. However, 924(e)(1) ed., II) mandated previous conceded state-court 924(e). Even so, contested matter ordering remand. 28 infirmity applied today's unnecessary exercise. Nevertheless, plurality today refines instructs explain is, according logic intervening precedents, unconstitutional need refinement endures yet reconsidered (1998), draws 487-490. 29 Almendarez-Torres, jurisprudence, majority recognizes wrongly decided. 248-249 (SCALIA, dissenting); 520-521 concurring). parties request appropriate Almendarez-Torres' continuing viability. Innumerable unconstitutionally sentenced flawed despite fundamental "imperative maintain absolute fidelity protections individual afforded notice, beyond-a-reasonable-doubt requirements." 536 545, 581-582 (2002) dissenting). my broadening permitting papers, agreements assortment doubt, believes. ante, permits. For reason, forth Parts I, II, correctly declines Taylor. procedure rejects gives I join opinion. whom BREYER join, dissenting. 32 adopts compelled precedent, sense matter, substantially frustrate Congress' scheme punishing repeat offenders violate gun laws. willing acknowledge occurred, unpermitted refuses accept additional, commonsense inference, substantial contrary: punished buildings. 33 petitioner, denied crimes that, crimes, himself accepting punishment burglarizing seeking benefit unavailability certain old minor ambiguity crimes' asks foreclose resort uncontradicted background gave 34 acquiesces wish ignore narrowest regarding respectfully dissent. 35 (ACCA) firearms violations felony." defining purpose, specified term crime, punishable year's imprisonment, "is arson, extortion, involves explosives, otherwise presents physical injury another." 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). statute's meant encompass "generic" elements: (1) in," (2) structure," (3) 598-599. left past qualified most formalistic satisfied course. Missouri prosecute overbroad purposes: They punish kind. Restricting inquiry face frustrated purposes recidivists escape ACCA's heightened solely fortuity "pragmatic" approach. Ante, (majority opinion). Every punishes criminalized actions; statutes, overinclusive. permitted "go mere conviction" determine, using sources, subset qualifying example, instructed instructions" "required recognizes, example exhaustive. 20-21. 1234, 1236 1992) (Breyer, J.). Rather, room simple sources aid identifies several consult ACCA: "charging assented." expand list include uncontradicted, internally parts relied 39 Massachusetts' "[w]hoever breaks enters ship, vessel vehicle, Mass. Gen. Laws Ann., ch. 266, (West 2000) (emphasis added); 18. specify instead closely copied know building. evidence. both secured attached applications. Those decisively illegal act inescapable breaking 40 Consider, first issue. May 1989, "did enter night property Jerri Cothran, therein" App. 5. place "30 Harlem St.," cross-reference "CC#91-394783." 41 stop there. Since name "building, vehicle," concludes transgressing laws doing vessel. (Although proceedings, items longer available apparently seen preserve miscellany long-past convictions.) 42 portions report. lists describes form) offense, names victim address, contains number (though differently hyphenated) itself. addition, specifies "PROPERTY" (meaning "Goods stolen, destroyed, etc.") "Cellar Door." 6. victim, date, documents) detail why began proceedings against Shepard: 43 "[R]esponded [radio call] St. B-E progress. arrival observed cellar door rear broken down. Spoke approx 3:00 a.m. she heard noises downstairs. She suspect pantry." 7. 44 Three relationship (whose finds completely unobjectionable) consider). entirely them casts doubt veracity others. importantly, common behind whatever prosecuted 314 2003) ("[T]here compelling inference embodied events file"). 45 contradicting understanding. Notably, throughout contemporaneous result admission, During hearings, submit carefully dances around key issues run afoul thought substance focuses hearing response. regard, strangely ambiguous. discussing states plea] read" "and ask me 100. ("I true"). affidavit's statements similar. 46 denial (or to) specific happen date through proceeded pantry, on. believe presume violated duty ensure Massachusetts, "[a] choice plead conviction; established." Commonwealth DelVerde, 398 288, 296, 496 N. E. 1357, 1362 (1986). result, admits open unless element 297, 2d, 1363. Colon, 439 519, 529, 13, 789 566, 573, (2003) (guilty facts); Blumenson, Fisher, & D. Kanstroom, Practice 37.7B, 288 (1998) ("Usually accomplished recitation either grand minutes reports, evidence, basis" (footnote omitted)). Cf. Forde, 392 453, 458, 510, 513 (1984) (conviction uncorroborated confession; rather, "real imaginary"). unlikely really intended various discussed presence 47 More likely, attorney phrased meaning: asked, answered, precise question: "Is true?" fail relevant, long agreeing break-in entire proceeding. 48 scenarios bargaining, due unexpected twists premised original investigation. confused meaning guilt. 601-602 ("[I]f lesser, nonburglary bargain, seem unfair here: All signs everyone judge, prosecutor, defense lawyer, caught him. Given report's never-superseded allegation burglarized strains credulity point assert car. surely detect "an air make-believe" 311. 49 majority's rule, forces feign agnosticism knowable facts, squared twin goals incapacitating offenders, consistently peculiarities 582 ("`[I]n fairness, ensure, extent prerogatives type cases'" Rep. 98-190, (1983))). overscrupulous regard formality leads absurd plainly hoped avoid. 50 principal reasons ruling: adherence trial. 51 hardly convincing. above, Supra, 30-31. disposition therefore, direct conflict spirit "[f]air[ness]" defendants. great deal positively just) acting plain knew impracticality mini-sentencing-trials featuring opposing perusing lengthy transcripts case: proposed small documentary relate dispute, indicated counterevidence. 52 central effectuate recidivist responds reality "were labeled law." 589. promote goal, injects new arbitrariness depend States' retention policies musty "written agreement[s]" recordings "plea colloqu[ies]" ancillary words, critical issue, all. 53 strongly driving itself, "[d]evelopments Taylor." (plurality defends related 24-26 opinion); 27-28 judgment). criticized beginning, (dissenting Ring Arizona, 584, 619 Blakely Washington, 344-345 (2004) 254 (1999) (KENNEDY, Blakely, 340-344 (BREYER, 327-331 battle lost. 54 thing rule's bounds, quite another extend territory succeeding expressly disclaimed. reads shadow possibly implicating recidivism determinations, until safe formalism. 301 ("`Other increases penalty prescribed proved reasonable doubt'" added; quoting 490)). 244 J.) (similar). 55 post-Apprendi world, understand concern. To contrary, especially "tradition treating factor" determined 243 substantive "established procedures satisfying fair guarantees." 249. 235, concerned extremely seriously contested. 33-35 shortcomings affidavit). shoes. When go invites prosecuting "to jury" 234-235. "[T]he introduction prejudice," likely strong "violent," short, merits doctrine, doctrine currently bear on, extended determinations plurality's 24-26, THOMAS' 27-28, misplaced. 56 57 explained properly applicability otherwise,

Classification Label: 0