October Term 2010 · Docket 10-5258
Does a prior conviction count if the law changed the maximum sentence after the crime?
The dispute centers on whether a state law change that increased a maximum sentence applies to past convictions.
Verified source milestones
- — 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.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the side that brought the case's counsel argued that statutory words, purpose, and results all matter when construing the law.
The government's counsel emphasized that the statute defines qualifying offenses by the maximum term prescribed by law.
Justices debated whether the present tense in the statute refers to the time of the prior offense or the current sentencing date.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-21
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case asks how courts count prior convictions when state laws change sentencing rules.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 25, 2011.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the court to count his prior convictions based on the law in effect when he committed them.
The government wants the court to count his prior convictions based on the current maximum sentence.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that the statute requires looking at the law that existed when the prior offense occurred.
The government argues that the statute refers to the maximum term prescribed by law at the time of sentencing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the state prescribes a ten-year maximum for the defendant because the law change was not retroactive.
Justice Sotomayor questioned the logic of punishing someone for activity that was considered less serious at the time of the crime.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-21
Why it matters
This case determines how courts calculate criminal history scores for federal sentencing. It affects the length of prison sentences for defendants with prior state convictions. The outcome clarifies the interaction between state sentencing laws and federal sentencing guidelines.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
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 Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 11-25 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 11-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-13 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-43 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 43-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 43-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-21
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-47 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-47
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.