Burgess v. United States
Full Opinion (html_with_citations)
delivered the opinion of the Court.
For certain federal drug offenses, the Controlled Substances Act mandates a minimum sentence of imprisonment for ten years. 21 U. S. C. § 841(b)(1)(A). That minimum doubles to 20 years for defendants previously convicted of a âfelony drug offense.â Ibid. The question in this case is whether a state drug offense classified as a misdemeanor, but punishable by more than one yearâs imprisonment, is a âfelony drug offenseâ as that term is used in § 841(b)(1)(A).
Two statutory definitions figure in our decision. Section 802(13) defines the unadorned term âfelonyâ to mean any âoffense classified by applicable Federal or State law as a felony.â Section 802(44) defines the compound term âfelony drug offenseâ to mean an offense involving specified drugs that is âpunishable by imprisonment for more than one year under any law of the United States or of a State or foreign country.â
The term âfelony drug offenseâ contained in § 841(b)(l)(A)âs provision for a 20-year minimum sentence, we hold, is defined exclusively by § 802(44) and does not incorporate § 802(13)âs definition of âfelony.â A state drug offense punishable by more than one year therefore qualifies as a âfelony drug *127 offense,â even if state law classifies the offense as a misdemeanor.
I
Petitioner Keith Lavon Burgess pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of cocaine base in violation of 21 U. S. C. §§ 841(a) and 846. 1 A violation of § 841(a) involving that quantity of cocaine base ordinarily carries a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years. § 841(b)(1)(A). The minimum sentence increases to 20 years, however, if the crime follows a prior conviction for a âfelony drug offense.â Ibid.
Burgess had previously been convicted of possessing cocaine in violation of S. C. Code Ann. § 44-53-370(c) and (d)(1) (2002 and Supp. 2007). Although that offense carried a maximum sentence of two yearsâ imprisonment, South Carolina classified it as a misdemeanor. § 44-53-370(d)(l). Burgessâ prior South Carolina conviction, the Government urged, raised the minimum sentence for his federal conviction to 20 years. The enhancement was mandatory, the Government maintained, because Congress defined âfelony drug offenseâ to include state cocaine offenses âpunishable by imprisonment for more than one year.â 21 U. S. C. §802(44). 2
Burgess contested the enhancement of his federal sentence. The term âfelony drug offense,â he argued, incorporates the term âfelony,â a word separately defined in § 802(13) to mean âany Federal or State offense classified by *128 applicable Federal or State law as a felony.â A prior drug offense does not rank as a âfelony drug offense,â he contended, unless it is (1) classified as a felony under the law of the punishing jurisdiction, per § 802(13); and (2) punishable by more than one yearâs imprisonment, per § 802(44).
Rejecting Burgessâ argument, the District Court ruled that § 802(44) alone controls the meaning of âfelony drug offenseâ as that term is used in § 841(b)(1)(A). Although the District Courtâs ruling subjected Burgess to a 20-year minimum sentence, the Government moved for a downward departure based on Burgessâ substantial assistance in another prosecution. See 18 U. S. C. § 3553(e) (2000 ed., Supp. V). The court granted the motion and sentenced Burgess to 156 monthsâ imprisonment followed by ten yearsâ supervised release.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed. The ââcommonsense way to interpret âfelony drug offense,â â â that court said, â âis by reference to the definition in §802(44).ââ 478 F. 3d 658, 662 (2007) (quoting United States v. Roberson, 459 F. 3d 39, 52 (CAI 2006)). The Fourth Circuit found nothing in the âplain language or statutory scheme ... to indicate that Congress intended âfelony drug offenseâ also to incorporate the definition [of âfelonyâ] in § 802(13).â 478 F. 3d, at 662.
Burgess, proceeding pro se, petitioned for a writ of certiorari. We granted the writ, 552 U. S. 1074 (2007), to resolve a split among the Circuits on the question Burgess presents: Does a drug crime classified as a misdemeanor by state law, but punishable by more than one yearâs imprisonment, rank as a âfelony drug offenseâ under 21 U. S. C. § 841(b)(1)(A)? Compare 478 F. 3d 658 (case below) and Roberson, 459 F. 3d 39 (§ 802(44) provides exclusive definition of âfelony drug offenseâ), with United States v. West, 393 F. 3d 1302 (CADC 2005) (both § 802(13) and § 802(44) limit meaning of âfelony drug offenseâ).
*129 II
A
The Controlled Substances Act (CSA), 21 U. S. C. §801 et seq., contains two definitions central to the dispute before us; they bear repetition in full. Section 802(13) provides:
âThe term âfelonyâ means any Federal or State offense classified by applicable Federal or State law as a felony.â
Section 802(44) states:
âThe term âfelony drug offenseâ means an offense that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year under any law of the United States or of a State or foreign country that prohibits or restricts conduct relating to narcotic drugs, marihuana, anabolic steroids, or depressant or stimulant substances.â
Burgess argues here, as he did below, that âfelony drug offense,â as used in § 841(b)(1)(A), should be construed to incorporate both the definition of âfelonyâ in § 802(13) and the definition of âfelony drug offenseâ in §802(44). Under his reading, the § 841(b)(1)(A) enhancement is triggered only when the prior conviction is both âclassified by applicable Federal or State law as a felony,â § 802(13), and âpunishable by imprisonment for more than one year,â §802(44).
The Government, in contrast, reads §802(44) to provide the exclusive definition of âfelony drug offense.â Under the Governmentâs reading, all defendants whose prior drug crimes were punishable by more than one year in prison would be subject to the § 841(b)(1)(A) enhancement, regardless of the punishing jurisdictionâs classification of the offense.
The Governmentâs reading, we are convinced, correctly interprets the statutory text and context. Section 802(44) defines the precise phrase used in § 841(b)(1)(A) â âfelony drug offense.â âStatutory definitions control the meaning of statutory words ... in the usual case.â Lawson v. Suwannee *130 Fruit & S. S. Co., 386 U. S. 198, 201 (1949). See also Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U. S. 914, 942 (2000) (âWhen a statute includes an explicit definition, we must follow that definition . . . .â); 2A N. Singer & J. Singer, Sutherland on Statutory Construction §47:7, pp. 298-299, and nn. 2-3 (7th ed. 2007) (hereinafter Singer).
The CSA, to be sure, also defines the term âfelony.â The language and structure of the statute, however, indicate that Congress used the phrase âfelony drug offenseâ as a term of art defined by §802(44) without reference to §802(13). First, Congress stated that â[t]he term âfelony drug offenseâ means an offense that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year.â §802(44) (emphasis added). âAs a rule, [a] definition which declares what a term âmeansâ . . . excludes any meaning that is not stated.â Colautti v. Franklin, 439 U. S. 379, 392-393, n. 10 (1979) (some internal quotation marks omitted). See also Groman v. Commissioner, 302 U. S. 82, 86 (1937); 2A Singer §47:7, p. 306, and n. 20.
Second, the term âfelonyâ is commonly defined to mean a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. See, e. g., 18 U. S. C. § 3559(a) (classifying crimes with a maximum term of more than one year as felonies); Blackâs Law Dictionary 651 (8th ed. 2004) (defining âfelonyâ as â[a] serious crime usu[ally] punishable by imprisonment for more than one year or by deathâ). Section 802(44)âs definition of âfelony drug offenseâ as âan offense ... punishable by imprisonment for more than one year,â in short, leaves no blank to be filled by §802(13) or any other definition of âfelony.â
Third, if Congress wanted âfelony drug offenseâ to incorporate the definition of âfelonyâ in § 802(13), it easily could have written §802(44) to state: âThe term âfelony drug offenseâ means a felony that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year . . . .â See Roberson, 459 F. 3d, at 52. Congress has often used that drafting technique â i. e., re *131 peating a discretely defined word â when it intends to incorporate the definition of a particular word into the definition of a compound expression. See, e. g., 15 U. S. C. § 1672(a)-(b) (defining âearningsâ and then defining âdisposable earningsâ as âthat part of the earningsâ meeting certain criteria); 18 U. S. C. § 1956(c)(3)-(4) (defining âtransactionâ and then defining âfinancial transactionâ as âa transaction whichâ meets other criteria); § 1961(1), (5) (2000 ed. and Supp. V) (defining âracketeering activityâ and then defining âpattern of racketeering activityâ to require âat least two acts of racketeering activityâ). 3
*132 Fourth, our reading avoids anomalies that would arise if both 21 U. S. C. § 802(13) and § 802(44) governed application of the sentencing enhancement in § 841(b)(1)(A). Notably, §802(44) includes foreign offenses punishable by more than one year, while § 802(13) includes only federal and state offenses. Incorporation of §802(13) into § 841(b)(1)(A) would exclude enhancement based on a foreign offense, notwithstanding the express inclusion of foreign offenses in § 802(44)âs definition of âfelony drug offense.â Furthermore, some States and many foreign jurisdictions do not label offenses as felonies or misdemeanors. See N. J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:l-4 (West 2005); Me. Rev. Stat. Ann., Tit. 17-A, §1252 (Supp. 2007); Brief for United States 35. Burgessâ compound definition of âfelony drug offenseâ leaves unanswered the appropriate classification of drug convictions in those jurisdictions. See, e. g., United States v. Brown, 937 F. 2d 68, 70 (CA2 1991) (relying on New Jersey common law to determine that the State classifies offenses punishable by more than one year as felonies). No such uncertainty arises under the precise definition Congress provided in §802(44).
Finally, reading § 802(44) as the exclusive definition of âfelony drug offenseâ hardly renders § 802(13) extraneous. Section 802(13) serves to define âfelonyâ for many CSA provisions using that unadorned term. See, e.g., §§ 824(a)(2) (revocation of license to manufacture controlled substances upon conviction of a felony), 843(b) (use of a communication facility to commit a felony), 843(d)(l)-(2) (sentencing enhancements), 843(e) (prohibition on engaging in transactions *133 involving listed chemicals upon conviction of a felony involving those chemicals), 848(c)(1) (definition of âcontinuing criminal enterpriseâ), 848(e)(1)(B) (mandatory minimum term for killing a law enforcement officer to avoid prosecution for a felony), 853(d) (rebuttable presumption that property acquired during commission of certain felonies is subject to criminal forfeiture), 878(a)(3) (authority to make warrantless arrest where there is probable cause to believe a felony has been committed).
B
The drafting history of the CSA reinforces our reading of §802(44) as the exclusive definition of âfelony drug offense.â In 1988, Congress first used the term âfelony drug offenseâ to describe the type of prior conviction that would trigger a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence under § 841(b)(1)(A). See National Narcotics Leadership Act, Pub. L. 100-690, § 6452(a), 102 Stat. 4371. The 1988 definition of the term was placed within § 841(b)(1)(A) itself; the definition covered âan offense that is a felony under any . . . Federal law . . . or . . . any law of a State or a foreign countryâ prohibiting or restricting conduct relating to certain types of drugs. § 6452(a)(2), ibid 4 But in 1994, Congress amended the definition, replacing âan offense that is a felony under . . . any law of a State,â ibid, (emphasis added), with âan offense that is punishable by imprisonment for more than one year under any law ... of a State,â Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, Pub. L. 103-322, § 90105(c)-(d), 108 *134 Stat. 1988 (emphasis added). In lieu of incorporation within § 841(b)(1)(A), the new definition was placed in a discrete §802 definition section. Ibid.
This alteration lends considerable support to our reading of the statute. Before 1994, the definition of âfelony drug offenseâ depended on the vagaries of state-law classifications of offenses as felonies or misdemeanors. The 1994 amendments replaced that definition with a uniform federal standard based on the authorized length of imprisonment. By recognizing §802(44) as the exclusive definition of âfelony drug offense,â our reading serves an evident purpose of the 1994 revision: to bring a measure of uniformity to the application of § 841(b)(1)(A) by eliminating disparities based on divergent state classifications of offenses.
By contrast, Burgess reads the 1994 alteration as merely adding a length-of-imprisonment requirement to a definition that already required â and, he contends, continues to require â designation of an offense as a felony by the punishing jurisdiction. That view, however, is difficult to square with Congressâ deletion of the word âfelonyâ and substitution of the phrase âpunishable by imprisonment for more than one year.â
If Burgess were correct, moreover, the sole effect of the 1994 change would have been to exclude from the compass of § 841(b)(1)(A) the few drug offenses classified as felonies under the law of the punishing jurisdiction but subject to a sentence of one year or less. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 6-8. 5 See also Brief for Petitioner 15 (purpose of 1994 alteration was to eliminate enhancement for âtruly minor offensesâ nonetheless classified as felonies). Burgess concedes that under *135 his reading of the statute âthe language that Congress added [in 1994] has very little practical effect,â but defends his interpretation on the ground that Congress labeled the changes âconforming amendments.â Tr. of Oral Arg. 8. See also 108 Stat. 1987; Brief for Petitioner 12.
Burgess places more weight on the âConforming Amendmentsâ caption than it can bear. Congress did not disavow any intent to make substantive changes; rather, the amendments were âconformingâ because they harmonized sentencing provisions in the CSA and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act, 84 Stat. 1285, 21 U. S. C. § 951 et seq. Treating the amendments as nonsubstantive would be inconsistent with their text, not to mention Burgessâ own view that §802(44) added a new length-of-imprisonment requirement to the definition of âfelony drug offense.â
In sum, the 1994 alteration replaced a patchwork of state and foreign classifications with a uniform federal standard based on the authorized term of imprisonment. Burgessâ argument that Congress added something â the definition now in §802(44) â but subtracted nothing encounters formidable impediments: the text and history of the statute.
C
Burgess urges us to apply the rule of lenity in determining whether the term âfelony drug offenseâ incorporates §802(13)âs definition of âfelony.â â[T]he touchstone of the rule of lenity is statutory ambiguity.â Bifulco v. United States, 447 U. S. 381, 387 (1980) (internal quotation marks omitted). âThe rule comes into operation at the end of the process of construing what Congress has expressed,â Callanan v. United States, 364 U. S. 587,596 (1961), and âapplies only when, after consulting traditional canons of statutory construction, we are left with an ambiguous statute,â United States v. Shabani, 513 U. S. 10, 17 (1994). Here, Congress expressly defined the term âfelony drug offense.â The definition is coherent, complete, and by all signs exclusive. *136 Accordingly, there is no ambiguity for the rule of lenity to resolve.
For the reasons stated, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is
Affirmed.
Although Title 21 of the United States Code has not been enacted as positive law, we refer to it rather than the underlying provisions of the Controlled Substances Act, 84 Stat. 1242, as amended, 21 U. S. C. §801 et seq., for the sake of simplicity. The relevant provisions of Title 21 have not changed from the time of Burgessâ offense, and all citations are to the 2000 edition through Supplement V.
Burgess received a one-year suspended sentence for his South Carolina conviction, but does not dispute that the offense was âpunishable by imprisonment for more than one year.â §802(44) (emphasis added).
Burgess offers four examples of defined words nested within defined phrases where, he asserts, the definition of the word is embraced within the phrase, although the word is not repeated in the definition of the phrase. See Reply Brief 11-12; Tr. of Oral Arg. 6,11-12. In all but one of these examples, however, the definition of the phrase is introduced by the word âincludes.â See 2 U. S. C. § 1301(4), (6), (7); 18 U. S. C. § 2266(3)-(4). â[T]he word âincludesâ is usually a term of enlargement, and not of limitation.â 2A Singer §47:7, p. 305 (some internal quotation marks omitted). Thus â[a] term whose statutory definition declares what it âincludesâ is more susceptible to extension of meaning . . . than whereâ â as in §802(44) â âthe definition declares what a term âmeans.â â Ibid. See also Groman v. Commissioner, 302 U. S. 82, 86 (1937) (â[W]hen an exclusive definition is intended the word âmeansâ is employed,... whereas here the word used is âincludes.ââ).
Burgessâ fourth example is also inapposite. The definition of âdebtorâs principal residenceâ in the Bankruptcy Code, he notes, does not repeat the word âdebtor,â itself a discretely defined term. See 11 U. S. C. § 101(13), (13A) (2000 ed., Supp. V). Section 101(13A) states: âThe term âdebtorâs principal residenceâ â (A) means a residential structure, including incidental property, without regard to whether that structure is attached to real property; and (B) includes an individual condominium or cooperative unit, a mobile or manufactured home, or trailer.â That definition, unlike 21 U. S. C. § 802(44), is incomplete on its face because nothing in the definition of âdebtorâs principal residenceâ elucidates the word âdebtorâs.â Given that void and 11 U. S. C. § 101(13A)âs placement in the Bankruptcy Code, it is reasonable to assume that Congress wanted courts to read the phrase âdebtorâs principal residenceâ in light of the separate definition of *132 âdebtor.â Indeed, a contrary reading would yield the absurd result that every residential structure is a âdebtorâs principal residence.â
At most, therefore, Burgessâ fourth example illustrates the importance of considering context in applying canons of statutory construction. There may well be other examples lurking in the United States Code of nested terms that draw their meaning from two different statutory provisions without repeating one term in the definition of the other. But âfelony drug offenseâ is not among them.
The fall definition stated:
âFor purposes of this subparagraph, the term 'felony drug offenseâ means an offense that is a felony under any provision of this title or any other Federal law that prohibits or restricts conduct relating to narcotic drugs, marihuana, or depressant or stimulant substances or a felony under any law of a State or a foreign country that prohibits or restricts conduct relating to narcotic drugs, marihuana, or depressant or stimulant substances.â National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988, Pub. L. 100-690, § 6452(a)(2), 102 Stat. 4371.
The examples provided by Burgess of such atypical categorization, Brief for Petitioner 22, all carry maximum sentences of exactly one year. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 13-701(0(5) (West 2001), 13-3405(B)(1) (West Supp. 2007); Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 2925.11(C) (Lexis 2007 Cum. Supp.), 2929.14(A)(5) (Lexis Supp. 2007); N. C. Gen. Stat. Ann. §§ 15A-1340.17, 90-95(d) (Lexis 2007).