Beckles v. United States, 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court evaluated whether the residual clause in the United States Advisory Sentencing GuidelinesUnited States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual §4B1.2(a)(2) (Nov. 2006) (USSG). was unconstitutionally vague.Beckles v. United States, No. 15–8544 580 U.S. ___ (2017), slip. op. at 1, 3.Leah M. Litman & Luke C. Beasley, How the Sentencing Commission Does and Does Not Matter in Beckles v. United States, 165 U. PA. L. REV. ONLINE 33 (2016).
On November 28, 2016, oral arguments were heard, where a private attorney appeared for the accused, Deputy U.S. Solicitor General Michael Dreeben appeared for the government, and a professor appeared as a court appointed amicus curiae to defend the lower court's opinion.
On March 6, 2017, the Supreme Court delivered judgment in favor of the government, voting unanimously to affirm the lower court.The Supreme Court, 2016 Term — Leading Cases, 131 HARV. L. REV. 293 (2017). In an opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that "the advisory Guidelines are not subject to vagueness challenges under the Due Process Clause" of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.Beckles, slip op. at 1.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a brief concurrence.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg concurred only in the judgment, stressing that the commentary to the Guidelines specifically mentioned Beckles' offense.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor also concurred only in the judgment, agreeing with Ginsburg that the commentary to the Guidelines applied to Beckles, but going on to opine that the Guidelines as a whole may still be unconstitutionally vague.
See also List of United States Supreme Court cases Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volume List of United States Supreme Court cases by the Roberts Court
References
External links
Case page at SCOTUSblog