United States v. Rodriquez

Media Items
Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Charles A. Rothfeld (on behalf of the Respondent)
Kannon K. Shanmugam (on behalf of the Petitioner)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
06-1646
Petitioner: 
United States
Respondent: 
Gino Gonzaga Rodriquez
Decided By: 
Roberts Court (2006-)
Opinion: 
553 U.S. ___ (2008)

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, United States v. Rodriquez , 553 U.S. ___ (2008)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_06_1646)
Facts of the Case: 

When Gino Rodriquez was released from prison on supervision, he promptly absconded and was later found with $900 cash, heroin and a gun. Prosecutors argued that Rodriquez was subject to the Armed Career Criminal Act, which applies to those convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm if they have a total of three previous convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses. Rodriquez had two California burglary convictions. Prosecutors argued that the third required conviction was supplied by Rodriquez’s Washington drug offenses. Although none of the three drug convictions, on their own, was considered “serious,” the second and third were repeat offenses and therefore punishable by ten-year sentences sufficient to qualify as serious under the federal career criminal law.

Question: 

Does a crime qualify as “serious” for purposes of the federal career criminal law when the underlying offense is not considered grave, but carries a high prison sentence because it was not the first?

Conclusion: 

Yes. The Court held 6-3 that although the elements of a particular crime may not be considered "serious," a defendant's prior record will have a considerable bearing on making the determination. A crime's seriousness may be greatly enhanced when its maximum sentence is increased due to the defendant's prior convictions for similar or related crimes.

Decisions

Decision: 6 votes for United States, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 924

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Roberts
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Wrote a dissent
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the minority, joined Souter's dissent
Ginsburg
Voted with the majority
Breyer
Wrote the majority opinion
Alito

Full Opinion by Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr.