Harold E. Staples, Iii v. United States (511 U.S. 600)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 23, 1994 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
511 U.S. 600 · 114 S. Ct. 1793
Decided
May 23, 1994
Term
October Term 1993
Vote
7–2
Majority author
Justice Thomas
Issue area
Criminal Procedure
Disposition
Reversed and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party won
Ideological direction
Liberal

Opinion excerpt

Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. The National Firearms Act makes it unlawful for any person to possess a machinegun that is not properly registered with the Federal Government. Petitioner contends that, to convict him under the Act, the Government should have been required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew the weapon he possessed had the characteristics that brought it within the statutory definition of a machinegun. We agree and accordingly reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals. I The National Firearms Act (Act), 26 U. S. C. §§5801-5872, imposes strict registration requirements on statutorily defined “firearms.” The Act includes within the term “firearm” a machinegun, § 5845(a)(6), and further defines a machinegun as “any weapon which shoots,... or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger,” § 5845(b). Thus, any fully automatic weapon is a “firearm” within the meaning of the Act. Under the Act, all firearms must be registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record maintained by the Secretary of the Treasury. § 5841. Section 5861(d) makes it a crime, punishable by up to 10 years in prison, see § 5871, for any person to possess a firearm that is not properly registered. Upon executing a search warrant at petitioner’s home, local…

Excerpt of a 40,381-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database