October Term 2012 · Docket 11-8976

Does the government prove conspiracy withdrawal?

Smith argues the government must disprove withdrawal. The government says it need not.

Official caption
Smith 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

    Kramer argued the government need not disprove withdrawal.

    Sotomayor questioned the logic of extinguishing liability.

    Scalia asked if withdrawal is a crime element.

    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

Smith seeks a jury instruction on withdrawal. The government seeks to avoid that burden.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 6, 2012.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Smith wants the government to disprove withdrawal.

The government wants to avoid disproving withdrawal.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Smith argues withdrawal is an element of the crime.

The government argues withdrawal is not an element.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked if withdrawal is an element.

Justice Sotomayor asked why the government must prove amnesty.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the government's burden in conspiracy trials. It shapes how prosecutors prove criminal intent. It affects the rights of all federal defendants.

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