Syllabus | Opinion [ Kennedy ] | Concurrence [ OConnor ] | Concurrence [ Breyer ] | Dissent [ Thomas ] |
---|---|---|---|---|
HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version | HTML version PDF version |
WILLIAM JOSEPH HARRIS, PETITIONER v.
UNITED STATES
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
Petitioner bases his statutory argument that brandishing must be interpreted as an offense element on Jones v. United States, 526 U.S. 227 (1999). He bases his constitutional argument that regardless of how the statute is interpreted, brandishing must be charged in the indictment and found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt on Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). As I dissented in Jones and Apprendi and still believe both were wrongly decided, I find it easy to reject petitioners arguments. Even assuming the validity of Jones and Apprendi, however, I agree that petitioners arguments that brandishing must be charged in the indictment and found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt are unavailing. I therefore join Justice Kennedys opinion in its entirety.