Justices back enhanced sentencing requirements (April 29, 2009)

The Supreme Court held today that a federal law imposing an enhanced sentence for firing a gun during a drug crime or other violent crime applies even if the gun was fired accidentally or involuntarily.

Prosecutors charged both Christopher Michael Dean and Ricardo Curtis Lopez with robbing a bank in Rome, Ga., in 2004, in violation of the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. §1951(a), and aiding and abetting another in carrying, possessing, or discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii). While one of the men was allegedly taking cash from the bank teller’s drawer, the gun he was carrying went off, and the bullet hit a nearby wall panel. Following a jury trial, the defendants were convicted on both counts.

The presentence report recommended that the defendants were subject to the mandatory 10-year minimum term of imprisonment under § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii). The mean objected, arguing that the discharge of the firearm had been accidental. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georiga nonetheless held that § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) applied even when the discharge was unintentional. It therefore sentenced each of the defendants to the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 120 months.

In February, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the lower court’s opinion.

Circuit courts are divided about whether enhanced sentencing requirements apply in cases where the gun carried while committing the crime fires accidentally.

On April 29, the Supreme Court affirmed the Eleventh Circuit ruling in a 7-2 opinion written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

“Section 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) requires no separate proof of intent,” Roberts wrote. “The 10-year mandatory minimum applies if a gun is discharged in the course of a violent or drug trafficking crime, whether on purpose or by accident.”

Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen G. Breyer each filed separate dissenting opinions.

“Accidents happen, but they seldom give rise to criminal liability,” Stevens wrote. “Indeed, if they cause no harm, they seldom give rise to any liability. The court today nevertheless holds that petitioner is subject to a mandatory additional sentence — a species of criminal liability — for an accident that caused no harm.”

Question presented: Whether, under 18 U.S.C.924(c)(1)(A)(iii), the mere discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence or drug trafficking, even if accidental, is subject to a ten-year sentencing enhancement.