Bailey v. United States
| Bailey v. United States | |
|---|---|
| Argued October 30, 1995 Decided December 6, 1995 | |
| Full case name | Ronald J. Bailey v. United States of America; Candisha Summerita Robinson v. United States of America |
| Citations | 516 U.S. 137 (more) 116 S. Ct. 501; 133 L. Ed. 2d 472 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | United States v. Bailey, 36 F.3d 106, 308 U.S. App. D.C. 292 (D.C. Cir. 1994) |
| Holding | |
| "Use" of a firearm during or in relation to a drug crime or a crime of violence requires active employment of the firearm and not mere possession. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | O'Connor, joined by unanimous |
Superseded by | |
| Act of Nov. 3, 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-386, 112 Stat. 3469 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)) | |
Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137 (1995), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court interpreted a frequently used section of the federal criminal code. At the time of the decision, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) imposed a mandatory, consecutive five-year prison term on anyone who "during and in relation to any... drug trafficking crime... uses a firearm." The lower court had sustained the defendants' convictions, defining "use" in such a way as to mean little more than mere possession. The Supreme Court ruled instead that "use" means "active employment" of a firearm, and sent the cases back to the lower court for further proceedings. As a result of the Court's decision in Bailey, Congress amended the statute to expressly include possession of a firearm as requiring the additional five-year prison term.