United States v. One Assortment of 89 Firearms (465 U.S. 354)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 22, 1984 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 465 U.S. 354 · 104 S. Ct. 1099
- Decided
- February 22, 1984
- Term
- October Term 1983
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Burger
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Chief Justice Burger delivered the opinion of the Court. We granted certiorari to decide whether a gun owner’s acquittal on criminal charges involving firearms precludes a subsequent in rem forfeiture proceeding against those same firearms. I-H <3 On January 20, 1977, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms seized a cache of firearms from the home of Patrick Mulcahey. Mulcahey was subsequently indicted on charges that he had knowingly engaged in the business of dealing in firearms without a license, in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 922(a)(1). At his criminal trial, Mulcahey admitted that he had no license to deal in firearms and that he had bought and sold firearms during the period set forth in the indictment. His defense was that he had been entrapped into making the illegal firearms transactions. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty. Following Mulcahey’s acquittal of the criminal charges, the United States, pursuant to its authority under 18 U. S. C. § 924(d), instituted this in rem action for forfeiture of the seized firearms. On the basis of his earlier acquittal, Mul-cahey asserted the defenses of res judicata and collateral es-toppel. The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina struck Mulcahey’s defenses, reasoning that an in rem forfeiture proceeding under 18 U. S. C. § 924(d) is remedial in nature and is therefore properly characterized…
Excerpt of a 23,059-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.