October Term 2001 · Docket 00-10666

Does brandishing a firearm require a jury verdict?

Harris argues the brandish clause is a criminal element. The government treats it as a sentencing factor.

Official caption
Harris v. United States
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Ingram argued the brandish clause is a criminal element.

    Dreeben cited McMillan v. Pennsylvania as the backdrop.

    Ingram stated a favorable ruling has no prospective impact.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests whether a jury must find a defendant brandished a firearm. This finding affects the maximum prison sentence.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 25, 2002.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Harris wants a jury to find he brandished a firearm.

The government wants a judge to decide the brandish fact.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Harris argues the brandish clause is a criminal element.

The government argues the brandish clause is a sentencing factor.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if a favorable ruling impacts lower courts.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute defines the role of juries in sentencing. It determines how courts apply firearm statutes. It affects the length of prison sentences.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON