Source: cases/18usc922/us-544-385-small-v-us.case
Case source: https://www.neochart.com/catalog/cases/us/volume_544/0385_01/index.html
We consequently assume a congressional intent that the phrase “convicted in any court” applies domestically, not extraterri-torially.
Thus, the key statutory phrase “convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” somewhat less reliably identifies dangerous individuals for the purposes of U. S. law where foreign convictions, rather than domestic convictions, are at issue.
we conclude that the phrase “convicted in any court” refers only to domestic courts, not to foreign courts.
For these reasons, the judgment of the Third Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
In concluding that “any” means not what it says, but rather “a subset of any,” the Court distorts the plain meaning of the statute and departs from established principles of statutory construction.
casedsl 1
case /us/544/0385-01
name Small v. United States
cite 544 U.S. 385 (2005)
court Supreme Court of the United States
date 2005-04-26
url catalog/cases/us/volume_544/0385_01/index.html
source ir/caselaw/us_544.jsonl sha1=2532d98924ced643d8c5415974f9d0540067cbd4 chars=41985
law 18usc922 (g)(1)
role applied
posture criminal; guilty plea reserving the claim that a foreign conviction is not a 922(g)(1) predicate; district court and CA3 rejected the claim; certiorari by the defendant
result claimant-lost
element status.g1 : not-satisfied [law]
opinion majority
variant convicted-in-any-court/foreign-court-conviction
fact @571..716 [cuts-against] | In 1994 petitioner, Gary Small, was convicted in a Japanese court of having tried to smuggle several pistols, a rifle, and ammunition into Japan.
fact @717..765 [supports] | Small was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment.
rule @7904..8037 | We consequently assume a congressional intent that the phrase “convicted in any court” applies domestically, not extraterri-torially.
rule @6334..6619 | Thus, the key statutory phrase “convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” somewhat less reliably identifies dangerous individuals for the purposes of U. S. law where foreign convictions, rather than domestic convictions, are at issue.
held @15090..15197 | we conclude that the phrase “convicted in any court” refers only to domestic courts, not to foreign courts.
held @15287..15431 | For these reasons, the judgment of the Third Circuit is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
gloss The only predicate was a Japanese conviction; "any court" is read with an assumption of domestic reach (akin to, but not, the presumption against extraterritoriality), supported by anomalies a foreign reading would create in 921(a)(20), 921(a)(33) and 924(e). The length of the foreign sentence is irrelevant once the court is foreign.
element status.g1 : satisfied [law]
scope dissent
opinion Thomas, J., dissenting (joined by Scalia and Kennedy, JJ.)
variant convicted-in-any-court/foreign-court-conviction
fact @15591..15748 [supports] | Gary Small, having recently emerged from three years in Japanese prison for illegally importing weapons into that country, bought a gun in the United States.
held @16153..16350 | In concluding that “any” means not what it says, but rather “a subset of any,” the Court distorts the plain meaning of the statute and departs from established principles of statutory construction.
gloss Dissent reads "any court" literally to include foreign courts.
element possession : not-reached
gloss After release Small bought a gun from a Pennsylvania dealer and pleaded guilty; possession was not in dispute.
misfit The decision turns on one phrase inside status.g1 ("convicted in any court"); the law file has no sub-id for the court/jurisdiction of the predicate conviction, so the block sits on status.g1 as a whole and the phrase is carried only by the variant genus.
misfit Basis [law] on a guilty plea: the facts are admitted and the Court decides a pure question of statutory scope that disposes of the conviction; there is no value for "undisputed facts + legal ruling" (known one-basis-per-block limit). The Court formally remands; result claimant-lost records that the 922(g)(1) conviction cannot stand on this predicate.
misfit Polarity is strained: "convicted in a Japanese court" is one sentence that both supplies a conviction and, because the court is foreign, defeats the element; tagged cuts-against.