Legal Opinion

United States v. Rentz

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 3, 2015No. 12-4169Published

1Concurrence · HartzHartz, Circuit Judge

I join the concurrence of Judge Matheson. I add a few words, however, to elaborate further on why I believe the government’s arguments are rather strong, although not strong enough to overcome the rule of lenity.

As I read the words of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) in isolation, they lend themselves most readily to the government’s interpretation. The operative language for this case is as follows: “[A]ny person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence ..., uses ... a firearm, ... shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such crime of violence ... be sentenced to a term of…

Also in this document: Concurrence · Matheson.

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Brown v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Smith v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  4. Bell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  5. Sanabria v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API