Bailey v. United States

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Alan Edward Untereiner (Argued the cause for the petitioners)
Michael R. Dreeben (Argued the cause for the respondent)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
94-7448
Petitioner: 
Bailey
Respondent: 
United States
Consolidation: 
Robinson v. United States, No. 94-7492
Opinion: 
516 U.S. 137 (1995)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Bailey v. United States , 516 U.S. 137 (1995)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/1990-1999/1995/1995_94_7448)
Facts of the Case: 

Roland Bailey and Candisha Robinson were each convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(1), which, in relevant part, imposes a mandatory minimum sentence upon a person who "uses or carries a firearm" both "during and in relation to" a predicate offense. Bailey's Section 924(c)(1) conviction was based on a loaded pistol which the police found inside a bag in the locked trunk of a car he was driving after they arrested him for possession of illegal drugs. Robinson's Section 924(c)(1) conviction was based on an unloaded, holstered firearm which the police, executing a search warrant, found locked in a trunk in her bedroom closet, along with drugs and money from an earlier controlled buy. The D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, upheld the Section 924(c)(1) convictions, interpreting "use" of a gun in violation of Section 924(c)(1) in accordance with an "accessibility and proximity" test.

Question: 

Is evidence of the proximity and accessibility of a firearm to drugs or drug proceeds alone sufficient to support a conviction for "use" of a firearm during and in relation to a predicate narcotics offense under 18 U.S.C. Section 924(c)(1)?

Conclusion: 

No. The proximity and accessibility test for "use" is so broad that no independent role remains for "carry." "Use" in Section 924(c)(1) requires more than proximity and accessibility that might embolden a defendant. It requires active employment of the firearm by the defendant, making the firearm an operative factor in relation to the predicate offense.

Decisions

Decision: 9 votes for Bailey, 0 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 924

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Voted with the majority
Stevens
Wrote the majority opinion
O'Connor
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer

Full Opinion by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor