2010 Supreme Court term

CLIFTON TERELLE MCNEILL v. UNITED STATES

Dockets 10-5258Argued
AI-generated independent summary

This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.

In brief

Overview

Petitioner Clifton Terelle McNeill argues that the ACCA’s definition of a “serious” drug offense requires federal courts to look to the law presently in effect in the state at the time of sentencing.

Background and question before the Court

The petitioner argues that when the Court construes a statute, it must consider the statutory language, the purpose of the statute, and the results produced by the construction.

Congress defined a “serious” drug offense in the ACCA as one for which a State penalty of ten years or more is prescribed, intending Federal courts to look to the law presently in effect in that State.

According to Justice Sotomayor, the Court is asked to decide whether a change in state law after the offense but before sentencing can affect the ACCA’s “serious” drug offense determination.

What each side argues

Petitioner – Clifton Terelle McNeill

According to Petitioner, when this Court construes a statute, the words of the statute matter, the purpose of the statute matters, and the results produced by that construction matter.

According to Stephen C. Gordon (Petitioner), according to Stephen C. Gordon (Petitioner), it is not anomalous for predicate convictions to disappear when a statute is interpreted differently; thus, changes in statutory interpretation can affect ACCA predicate convictions.

Respondent – United States

Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.

What happened at oral argument

Justice Scalia asked whether the maximum punishment for the offense at the time it occurred should be considered, questioning the need to look at a later term.

According to Justice Sotomayor, justice Sotomayor inquired whether a modification of the law would apply retroactively to the defendant’s sentence, expressing uncertainty about its effect.

What the Court decided

Pending This section will be added when the relevant Court material is available.

Why it matters

Source-limited The available primary sources do not support a complete explanation yet.

Terms to know

No glossary terms are available for this guide.

Primary sources

Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.

  • 7d0a4df41793714d88e2-r1-20bcb13ee8d83269.pdforal argument transcript

Guide generated September 24, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.