{"argument_date":"2004-11-08T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2004-11-08T00:00:00Z","heading":"What happened at the argument","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2004","official_transcript_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","paragraphs":["Ms. Thompson argued the categorical method requires strict reliance on statutory elements.","She contended ambiguous convictions obtained under nongeneric statutes cannot be used as predicates.","Mr. Elwood argued police reports help clarify the specific property involved in the crime.","He stated the Court can look to conviction records to determine predicate status."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 34-38","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 34-38"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-12"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 42-44","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 42-44"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 16-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 16-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 25-25"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-31","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 29-31"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 36-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-42","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 42-42"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 1-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 1-2"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 23-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 8-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 8-12"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 1-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 1-6"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-16","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 12-16"}]}],"caption":"Shepard v. United States","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:29.991437Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"}],"case_status":"argued","dek":"The dispute centers on whether judges may consult police reports to classify ambiguous state burglary convictions under federal law.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2004-11-08T00:00:00Z","maturity":"official_transcript","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2004","official_disposition_urls":[],"official_docket_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/03-9168.html","primary_docket":"03-9168","revisions":[{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-31T15:23:19.306173Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":1},{"correction_note":"Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.","created_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":2}],"schema_version":"1.1","sections":[{"heading":"What this case is about","paragraphs":["Shepard v. United States tests the limits of the categorical method. This approach requires courts to look only at the statutory elements of a prior conviction. The case asks if courts may examine supporting documents when a statute covers multiple types of property."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 8, 2004."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-12"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["the side that brought the case wants the conviction excluded from federal sentencing calculations.","The government wants the conviction counted as a qualifying predicate offense."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["the side that brought the case argues courts must ignore police reports and rely solely on statutory text.","The government argues police reports provide necessary context for ambiguous statutes."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["Justice O'Connor asked if supporting documents show the property was a building, car, or boat.","Justice Scalia asked for a definition of a nongeneric burglary statute."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 34-38","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 34-38"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 42-44","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 42-44"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 16-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 16-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 25-25"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-31","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 29-31"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 36-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-42","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 42-42"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 1-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 1-2"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 23-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 8-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 8-12"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 1-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 1-6"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-16","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 12-16"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["This case defines how federal courts interpret state criminal records. It determines whether judges can use police reports to clarify ambiguous convictions. This process affects federal sentencing calculations for career criminals. It impacts the consistency of federal sentencing guidelines nationwide."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}]},{"heading":"What happens next","paragraphs":["This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 34-38","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 34-38"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 4-12"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 42-44","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 42-44"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 16-21","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 16-21"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 25-25"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-31","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 29-31"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 36-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 36-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-42","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 4, lines 42-42"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 1-2","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 1-2"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 23-36","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 23-36"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 8-12","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 5, lines 8-12"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 1-6","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 1-6"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-16","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 6, lines 12-16"}]}],"slug":"2004-03-9168-shepard-v-united-states","term":"2004","title":"Can courts use police reports to define ambiguous burglary convictions?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 29-7","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 26, lines 29-7"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 14-33","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2004/03-9168.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 14-33"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":null,"updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}