Washington, June 22 (BNA): The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, limited the scope of a federal law imposing strict penalties for crimes involving a gun.
The 7-2 decision united the conservative and liberal justices, although one dissenting judge compared the result to “Alice in Wonderland.” Judges have said the law cannot be used to extend sentences of criminals convicted of the offense of attempted robbery, the Associated Press reported.
The case before the judges concerned Justin Taylor, who was a marijuana dealer in the early 2000s in the Richmond, Virginia area. The government said he sold large quantities of marijuana to other dealers who distributed it. In 2003, he and another man plotted to steal money from the buyer, and during the robbery, the partner shot the man, killing the man.
Taylor was charged with “attempted Hobbes Act burglary,” a federal crime punishable by up to 20 years in prison. He was also charged under a federal law setting out mandatory minimum penalties for the use of a firearm in connection with a “violent crime.” Taylor pleaded guilty to both and was sentenced to 30 years in prison, 10 years longer than he could have received simply for the theft charge.
However, the majority of the court ruled that the attempted burglary of the Hobbes Code did not constitute a violent crime, and thus Taylor was not eligible for the longer sentence.
“Simply put, none of the elements of an attempted Hobbes burglary requires evidence that the defendant used, attempted, or threatened to use force,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote to the majority of the court.
The judges upheld a federal appeals court ruling that Taylor should be resentenced only for Hobbes’ burglary.
In dissent, Judge Clarence Thomas cited Lewis Carroll’s “Alice in Wonderland” and “Through the Glass.” The decision, he said, is an example of how the court’s approach to these types of cases has led lower courts to a “glass-eyed trip” during which judges found many “strange things”. Like Alice, he said, the court strayed far “down the rabbit hole.”
“I will hold Taylor accountable for what he actually did and support his conviction,” he wrote.
Judge Samuel Alito also disagreed, agreeing that court cases in this area of law “turned into fantasy land.”
Francis Pratt, one of Taylor’s attorneys, said in an email that his attorneys are “happy to know that the Supreme Court has ruled our client” and hope the decision helps others as well. Taylor’s trial came at a time when officials in Virginia were trying to reduce Richmond’s high murder rate in part by taking a hard line on gun crimes, and taking these cases to a federal court rather than a state court. He called this effort “Project Exile”.
MI