Skip to main content

Descamps v. United States

Docket No.11-9540
Op. Below9th Cir.
ArgumentJan 7, 2013
Vote8-1
AuthorElena Kagan
OpinionJun 20, 2013
TermOctober Term 2012
SCOTUS PageOpinion

Holding

Sentencing courts may not apply the modified categorical approach to a federal defendant when the crime of which the defendant was previously convicted has a single, indivisible set of elements.

Judgment

Reversed, 8-1, in an opinion by Elena Kagan on Jun 20, 2013. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion.

Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, is among the counsel to the NACDL as”amicus curiae”in this case.

Holding: Sentencing courts may not apply the modified categorical approach to a federal defendant when the crime of which the defendant was previously convicted has a single, indivisible set of elements.

Judgment:”Reversed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 20, 2013. Justice Thomas filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion.

Proceedings & orders timeline

Mar 19, 2012
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 27, 2012)
Apr 18, 2012
Order extending time to file response to petition to and including May 29, 2012.
May 21, 2012
Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including June 28, 2012.
Jun 28, 2012
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
Jul 12, 2012
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 24, 2012.
Jul 17, 2012
Supplemental brief of petitioner Matthew Robert Descamps filed. (Distributed)
Aug 31, 2012
Motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The petition for a writ of certiorari is GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.
Sep 11, 2012
Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioner Matthew Robert Descamps.
Oct 3, 2012
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 26, 2012.
Oct 5, 2012
The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including October 24, 2012.
Oct 5, 2012
The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including December 3, 2012.
Oct 18, 2012
Motion to file volume II of the joint appendix under seal filed by petitioner Matthew Robert Descamps.
Oct 24, 2012
Joint appendix filed. (Volume 1 of 2) (Statement of costs filed)
Oct 24, 2012
Brief of petitioner Matthew Robert Descamps filed.
Oct 29, 2012
Motion to appoint counsel filed by petitioner GRANTED. Dan B. Johnson, Esquire, of Spokane, Washington, is appointed to serve as counsel for the petitioner.
Oct 29, 2012
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 20, 2012.
Oct 31, 2012
SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Monday, January 7, 2013.
Oct 31, 2012
Brief amici curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. filed.
Nov 16, 2012
CIRCULATED.
Nov 26, 2012
Motion to file volume II of the joint appendix under seal GRANTED.
Dec 3, 2012
Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
Dec 5, 2012
Record recieved from U.S.C.A. for 9th Circuit. (1 box).
Dec 5, 2012
Record from U.S.D.C. for Eastern District of Washingon is electronic. There is 1 sealed envelope received from U.S.C.A. for 9th Circuit) that is a part of U.S.D.C. record.
Dec 27, 2012
Reply of petitioner Matthew Robert Descamps filed. (Distributed)Jan 7, 2013
Argued. For petitioner: Dan B. Johnson, Spokane, Wash. (Appointed by this Court.) For respondent: Benjamin J. Horwich, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
Jun 20, 2013
Judgment REVERSED. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Scalia, Kenendy, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion. Thomas, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Alito, J., filed a dissenting opinion.
Jul 3, 2013
Petition for Rehearing filed.
Aug 8, 2013
DISTRIBUTED.
Aug 30, 2013
Rehearing DENIED.
Aug 30, 2013
JUDGMENT ISSUED.
Sep 4, 2013
Record returned to U.S.C.A. for 9th Circuit.

Welcome to SCOTUSblog

Tell us a bit about yourself so we can tailor what you see. You can update these any time in your account.