Salinas v. United States

547 U.S. 188, 126 S. Ct. 1675, 164 L. Ed. 2d 364, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 3447
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 24, 2006
Docket05-8400
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 547 U.S. 188 (Salinas v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Salinas v. United States, 547 U.S. 188, 126 S. Ct. 1675, 164 L. Ed. 2d 364, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 3447 (2006).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Fifth Circuit for further consideration.

The Fifth Circuit concluded that petitioner’s prior conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance constituted a “controlled substance offense” for purposes of United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual §4Bl.l(a) (Nov. 2003). 142 Fed. Appx. 830 (2005). The term “controlled substance offense” is defined in pertinent part, however, as “an offense under federal or state law . . . that prohibits . . . the possession of a controlled substance (or a counterfeit substance) with intent to manufacture, import, export, distribute, or dispense” §4B 1.2(b) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit erred in treating petitioner’s conviction for simple possession as a “controlled substance offense.” The Solicitor General acknowledges that the Fifth Circuit incorrectly ruled for the United States on this ground. Brief in Opposition 8-9.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Moore v. United States
M.D. Florida, 2023
United States v. Brandon Romel Dupree
57 F. 4th 1269 (Eleventh Circuit, 2023)
United States v. Lewis
963 F.3d 16 (First Circuit, 2020)
United States v. Shalef Bell
Third Circuit, 2018
United States v. Malachi Glass
701 F. App'x 108 (Third Circuit, 2017)
Pedro Vazquez v. United States
702 F. App'x 50 (Third Circuit, 2017)
United States v. Hartsfield
160 F. Supp. 3d 1315 (M.D. Florida, 2016)
United States v. Alejandro Luviano
604 F. App'x 347 (Fifth Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Victor Johnson
Seventh Circuit, 2013
United States v. Johnson
586 F. App'x 666 (Seventh Circuit, 2013)
Julius Stevens v. United States
466 F. App'x 789 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
Nolan Nathaniel Edwards v. Warden, FCC Coleman
432 F. App'x 897 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Robinson
639 F.3d 489 (Eighth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Shannon
631 F.3d 1187 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
United States v. Neal
578 F.3d 270 (Fifth Circuit, 2009)
United States v. Posey
294 F. App'x 765 (Fourth Circuit, 2008)
Wilson v. Commissioner of Social Security
280 F. App'x 456 (Sixth Circuit, 2008)
United States v. Seib
555 F. Supp. 2d 981 (E.D. Wisconsin, 2008)
United States v. Ford
509 F.3d 714 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
Torres de la Cruz v. Greene
483 F.3d 1013 (Tenth Circuit, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
547 U.S. 188, 126 S. Ct. 1675, 164 L. Ed. 2d 364, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 3447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salinas-v-united-states-scotus-2006.