Term: 2004
Docket: 03-750
Gary Sherwood Small v. United States
- Pro
03-750 SMALL V. UNITED STATES DECISION BELOW: 333 F3d 425 CERT. GRANTED 3/29/2004 QUESTION PRESENTED: The statute in question, § 922(g)(1) of Title 18, United States Code, makes it unlawful: (g) ...for any person (1) who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year: ... to possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm. In the instant matter, Petitioner's only conviction occurred in Okinawa, Japan, and it was this Japanese conviction that served as the predicate felony in this §922(g)(I) prosecution. The Petitioner filed a motion to dismiss the indictment arguing that foreign felonies were not intended to count as the term "in any court" means any court in the United States. The motion was denied. While the third Circuit's affirmance of the lower court is consistent with a 1989 decision of the Fourth Circuit and a 1986 decision of the Sixth Circuit, the Tenth Circuit in 2000 and the Second Circuit, on August 27, 2003, held that foreign convictions do not count. Consequently, a clear conflict exists among the five Circuit Courts which have addressed the issue. The question presented, therefore, is whether the term "convicted in any court" contained in 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) includes convictions entered in foreign courts. LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 02-2785
In the case of Gary Sherwood Small v. United States, 2004, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Small by a 5-3 vote. The issue at hand was whether foreign convictions could be used to prohibit someone from owning a firearm under federal law in the United States. Small had been convicted of crimes in Japan and upon returning to America, he purchased guns which led to his arrest for violating a federal law that prohibits people with felony convictions from possessing firearms. However, the court held that "convicted in any court" as stated within this particular gun control statute referred only to domestic courts unless Congress explicitly states otherwise. Therefore, since it did not include foreign convictions like those of Mr.Small's case in Japan, he should not have been barred from owning guns based on his Japanese conviction alone.
In the dissenting opinion for Gary Sherwood Small v. United States, Justice Breyer argued that the majority's interpretation of 18 U.S.C § 922(g)(1) was too broad and inconsistent with Congress' intent. He contended that the law should only apply to domestic convictions rather than foreign ones as well. The justice pointed out potential problems in applying this statute to foreign convictions due to differences in legal systems, standards of proof, and rights afforded defendants abroad compared to those in America. Furthermore, he noted that it could lead to absurd results where an American citizen could be barred from owning a gun because they were convicted of a minor crime overseas which would not have been considered criminal under US law or resulted in such severe consequences domestically.
