what you should know about FEDERAL PRISON & 924(c)
Congressional research service
“Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: The 18 U.S.C. 924(c) Tack-On in Cases Involving Drugs or Violence”
BY: Charles Doyle – Senior Specialist in American Public Law
CRS Report was prepared for Members and Committee of Congress
Click here to read the report.
BY: Charles Doyle – Senior Specialist in American Public Law
CRS Report was prepared for Members and Committee of Congress
Click here to read the report.
fbop prison stats
The links below contain FBOP prison statistics based on the previous month's data. [Pulled September 27, 2014.] Statistics include inmate age, ethnicity, race, offenses, safety, security levels, sentences imposed, inmate population, prison staff and budget etc.
Federal Bureau of Prisons Statistics
Federal Bureau of Prisons Statistics (Part II)
Federal Bureau of Prisons Statistics
Federal Bureau of Prisons Statistics (Part II)
what is 924(c)?
The 924(c) statute is one of, if not the most complex law in the United States Constitution. Most people don't understand the intricacies of the law, even family members of those affected by this horrible injustice. The 2 documents below explain the history of the 924(c) statute, break down the "legalese;" defining terminology and what it means in lay-man's terms.
The History of 924(C)
What is 924(c) To Be Used For - Definitions and complex terms explained simply
The History of 924(C)
What is 924(c) To Be Used For - Definitions and complex terms explained simply
Deal Vs. The United States
Facts of the Case
Between January and April 1990, Thomas Lee Deal committed six bank robberies. In each robbery, he used a gun. Subsequently, Deal was convicted, in a single proceeding, of six counts of carrying and using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 USC section 924(c)(1). Section 924(c)(1) prescribes a 5-year prison term for the first such conviction, in addition to the punishment provided for the crime of violence, and requires a 20-year sentence "in the case of [a] second or subsequent conviction under this subsection." The District Court sentenced Deal to 5 years' imprisonment on the first section 924(c)(1) count and to 20 years on each of the five other counts, the terms to run consecutively. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Question
Does a criminal's second through sixth convictions under section 924(c)(1) in a single proceeding arise "in the case of his second or subsequent conviction" within the meaning of section 924(c)(1)?
Click here to listen to the oral arguments.
Conclusion
Decision: 6 votes for United States, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 924
Yes. In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that Deal's second through sixth convictions in a single proceeding arose "in the case of his second or subsequent conviction" within the meaning of section 924(c)(1), finding that the statute was not ambiguous. The Court rejected that the rule of lenity applied because Deal's "105-year sentence 'is so glaringly unjust.'" Writing for the court, Justice Scalia said the 105 years sentence for the gun offenses was not unjust "simply because [Deal] managed to evade detection, prosecution and conviction for the first five offenses and was ultimately tried for all six in a single proceeding." Justice Stevens wrote a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Harry A. Blackmun joined.
Click here for the full transcript text.
Between January and April 1990, Thomas Lee Deal committed six bank robberies. In each robbery, he used a gun. Subsequently, Deal was convicted, in a single proceeding, of six counts of carrying and using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence in violation of 18 USC section 924(c)(1). Section 924(c)(1) prescribes a 5-year prison term for the first such conviction, in addition to the punishment provided for the crime of violence, and requires a 20-year sentence "in the case of [a] second or subsequent conviction under this subsection." The District Court sentenced Deal to 5 years' imprisonment on the first section 924(c)(1) count and to 20 years on each of the five other counts, the terms to run consecutively. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Question
Does a criminal's second through sixth convictions under section 924(c)(1) in a single proceeding arise "in the case of his second or subsequent conviction" within the meaning of section 924(c)(1)?
Click here to listen to the oral arguments.
Conclusion
Decision: 6 votes for United States, 3 vote(s) against
Legal provision: 18 U.S.C. 924
Yes. In a 6-3 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that Deal's second through sixth convictions in a single proceeding arose "in the case of his second or subsequent conviction" within the meaning of section 924(c)(1), finding that the statute was not ambiguous. The Court rejected that the rule of lenity applied because Deal's "105-year sentence 'is so glaringly unjust.'" Writing for the court, Justice Scalia said the 105 years sentence for the gun offenses was not unjust "simply because [Deal] managed to evade detection, prosecution and conviction for the first five offenses and was ultimately tried for all six in a single proceeding." Justice Stevens wrote a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Harry A. Blackmun joined.
Click here for the full transcript text.
