Small v. United States, 544 U.S. 385 (2005)
Primary Holding
The phrase "convicted in any court" in the context of the unlawful gun possession statute encompasses only domestic convictions and does not include foreign convictions.
In the case of Small v. United States, the Supreme Court decided that the law against gun possession only applies to people convicted of crimes in U.S. courts, not those convicted in foreign courts. This matters because it means that if someone has a conviction from another country, they may still be allowed to own a gun in the U.S. This case is relevant for anyone with a foreign conviction who is concerned about their rights to own a firearm, as it clarifies that such convictions do not automatically disqualify them under U.S. law.
AI-generated plain-language summary to help you understand this case
In 1994, Gary Sherwood Small was convicted in a Japanese court for attempting to smuggle firearms and ammunition into Japan, for which he received a five-year prison sentence. After serving his sentence and returning to the United States, Small purchased a firearm from a Pennsylvania gun dealer. This action led to federal charges against him under the unlawful gun possession statute, which prohibits individuals convicted of crimes punishable by imprisonment for over one year from possessing firearms. Small pleaded guilty to the charges but reserved the right to contest his conviction on the basis that his prior conviction in Japan should not be considered under the statute, which references "convicted in any court." The Federal District Court and subsequently the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the government's position, determining that the statute applied to Small's foreign conviction. The case was brought before the Supreme Court on a writ of certiorari due to conflicting interpretations among various circuit courts regarding whether the phrase "convicted in any court" includes foreign convictions, with some circuits affirming inclusion and others rejecting it.
Whether the statutory phrase "convicted in any court" in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) includes convictions entered in foreign courts.
The judgment is reversed.
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decision Date
- November 3, 2004
- Jurisdiction
- federal
- Case Type
- landmark
- Majority Author
- Breyer
- Damages Awarded
- N/A
- Data Quality
- high
Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005)
Consumer LostA sentencing court under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) may not consider police reports or complaint applications to determine whether a prior guilty plea necessarily admitted to generic burglary; it is generally limited to examining the statutory definition, charging document, written plea agreement, transcript of plea colloquy, and any explicit factual finding by the trial judge to which the defendant assented.
Smith v. Massachusetts, 543 U.S. 462 (2005)
Consumer LostThe Double Jeopardy Clause prohibits a trial judge from reconsidering an acquittal once it has been formally entered, even if the judge believes that the initial acquittal was erroneous.
Pasquantino v. United States, 544 U.S. 349 (2005)
Consumer LostA scheme to defraud a foreign government of tax revenue constitutes a violation of the federal wire fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1343, as the statute's plain terms criminalize such conduct without infringing upon the common-law revenue rule.
Johnson v. United States, 544 U.S. 295 (2005)
Consumer LostThe period for the 1-year statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. §2255 begins when a petitioner receives notice of the order vacating a prior conviction used to enhance their federal sentence, provided that the petitioner has pursued the vacatur with due diligence in state court.