Supreme Court of the United States · 1991-05-30
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: criminal; sentencing after conviction for LSD distribution, affirmed by CA7 en banc; certiorari by defendants on whether carrier weight counts toward the mandatory-minimum threshold; result: claimant-won; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v)
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Distribution (delivery / actual, constructive, or attempted transfer of a controlled substance) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) Convictions for selling the LSD were not challenged; only the sentence was. | Unspecified variant | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Mens rea: "knowingly or intentionally" (including knowledge that the substance is a controlled substance) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) | Unspecified variant | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Partial penalty-tier drug type and quantity table (selected § 841(b)(1)(A)-(D) hook) | satisfied Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: law; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v); count: (b)(1)(B)(v) 5-year mandatory-minimum tier (1 gram or more of LSD mixture); subject: count=(b)(1)(B)(v) 5-year mandatory-minimum tier (1 gram or more of LSD mixture) Gross "street weight" of drug plus ingestible carrier it is diffused in counts; pure-drug weight is irrelevant except for PCP/methamphetamine. Containers and packaging (vial, car) are excluded because not mixed with the drug. | mixture-or-substance/carrier-medium-weight-included | Petitioners Richard L. Chapman, John M. Schoenecker, and Patrick Brumm were convicted of selling 10 sheets (1,000 doses) of blotter paper containing LSD, in violation of § 841(a).Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [480:659] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.The ten sheets of blotter paper carrying the 1,000 doses sold by petitioners weighed 5.7 grams; the LSD by itself weighed only about 50 milligrams, not even close to the one gram necessary to trigger the 5-year mandatory minimum of §841(b)(1)(B)(v).Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [4253:4502] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.The LSD crystals are inside of the paper, so that they are commingled with it, but the LSD does not chemically combine with the paper.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [12276:12410] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.So long as it contains a detectable amount, the entire mixture or substance is to be weighed when calculating the sentence.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [5764:5887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.The term does not include LSD in a bot-tie, or LSD in a car, because the drug is easily distinguished from, and separated from, such a “container.”Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [13259:13406] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.We think that the blotter paper used in this case, and blotter paper customarily used to distribute LSD, is a “mixture or substance containing a detectable amount” of LSD.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [11045:11216] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.We hold that the statute requires the weight of the carrier medium to be included when determining the appropriate sentence for trafficking in LSD, and that this construction is neither a violation of due process nor unconstitutionally vague.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [23201:23443] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Controlled substance (21 U.S.C. §§ 802(6), 812 Schedules I-V) or counterfeit substance (§ 841(a)(2)) | not_reached Excluded from merits counts applied / merits claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) | Unspecified variant | No source quotation recorded for this block. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Fifth Amendment Due Process / Equal Protection challenge to carrier-medium weight sentencing (Chapman) | not Excluded from merits counts applied / procedural basis: law; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) Fifth Amendment due-process/equal-protection facial challenge to weighing the carrier; hypotheticals about very heavy carriers do not help defendants who used the standard one. | rational-basis/street-weight-penalty-scheme | Petitioners appealed, claiming that the blotter paper is only a carrier medium, and that its weight should not be included in the weight of the drug for sentencing purposes.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [1325:1498] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.By measuring the quantity of the drugs according to the “street weight” of the drugs in the diluted form in which they are sold, rather than according to the net weight of the active component, the statute and the Sentencing Guidelines increase the penalty for persons who possess large quantities of drugs, regardless of their purity.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [18564:18899] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.We find that Congress had a rational basis for its choice of penalties for LSD distribution.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [18209:18301] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Rule of lenity in construing ambiguous penalty provisions of § 841(b) | not Excluded from merits counts applied / procedural basis: law; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) | no-grievous-ambiguity/plain-text-and-structure | There is no reason to resort to the rule of lenity in these circumstances.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [15501:15575] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c. |
| /us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991 | Fifth Amendment void-for-vagueness challenge to "mixture or substance" or analogue provisions | not Excluded from merits counts applied / procedural basis: law; claim: (a),(b)(1)(B)(v) | as-applied/sentencing-term-not-vague | First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [22168:22313] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.The fact that there may be plausible arguments against describing blotter paper impregnated with LSD as a “mixture or substance” containing LSD does not mean that the statute is vague.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [22364:22548] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c. |
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
So long as it contains a detectable amount, the entire mixture or substance is to be weighed when calculating the sentence.
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
So long as it contains a detectable amount, the entire mixture or substance is to be weighed when calculating the sentence.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [5764:5887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.PARTIAL_THRESHOLD_TABLE: this entry anchors the § 841(b)(1) drug-specific threshold matrix without pretending that one heroin threshold quote enumerates every listed substance and tier. Under Chapman v. United States (500 U.S. 453 (1991)), "mixture or substance" includes the carrier medium in which the drug is marketed/consumed, but not unusable waste water or packaging containers that must be separated before use.
interpretation
The term does not include LSD in a bot-tie, or LSD in a car, because the drug is easily distinguished from, and separated from, such a “container.”
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
The term does not include LSD in a bot-tie, or LSD in a car, because the drug is easily distinguished from, and separated from, such a “container.”Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [13259:13406] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.PARTIAL_THRESHOLD_TABLE: this entry anchors the § 841(b)(1) drug-specific threshold matrix without pretending that one heroin threshold quote enumerates every listed substance and tier. Under Chapman v. United States (500 U.S. 453 (1991)), "mixture or substance" includes the carrier medium in which the drug is marketed/consumed, but not unusable waste water or packaging containers that must be separated before use.
interpretation
By measuring the quantity of the drugs according to the “street weight” of the drugs in the diluted form in which they are sold, rather than according to the net weight of the active component, the statute and the Sentencing Guidelines increase the penalty for persons who possess large quantities of drugs, regardless of their purity.
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
By measuring the quantity of the drugs according to the “street weight” of the drugs in the diluted form in which they are sold, rather than according to the net weight of the active component, the statute and the Sentencing Guidelines increase the penalty for persons who possess large quantities of drugs, regardless of their purity.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [18564:18899] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.Rejected in Chapman v. United States (500 U.S. 453 (1991)): Congress had a rational basis for tying penalty tiers to street weight of the mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of the drug.
interpretation
First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case.
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
First Amendment freedoms are not infringed by §841, so the vagueness claim must be evaluated as the statute is applied to the facts of this case.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [22168:22313] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.Evaluated as applied to the facts of the case because § 841 implicates no First Amendment freedoms.
interpretation
So long as it contains a detectable amount, the entire mixture or substance is to be weighed when calculating the sentence.
/us/500/0453-01 — Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
So long as it contains a detectable amount, the entire mixture or substance is to be weighed when calculating the sentence.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_500.jsonl#/us/500/0453-01; Unicode character offsets [5764:5887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 9c5fd40cbce1f1caf4effb469b4d262677c3bae7a486aaca29dd0c70e05d713c.Invoked when statutory text of § 841(b) is grievously ambiguous (declined in Chapman where "mixture or substance" was held unambiguous; reinforced in Burrage where "results from" was given its ordinary but-for meaning).