Flores-Figueroa v. United States, No. 08-108, 556 U.S. __, 129 S. Ct. 1886, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 3305 (May 4, 2009)
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that the aggravated identity theft statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1028A(a)(1), requires federal prosecutors to show that a defendant knew the means of identification belonged to another person.
Section 1028A(a)(1) imposes a mandatory two-year additional sentence on individuals convicted of certain crimes if, during the commission of those crimes, the individual "knowingly transfers, possesses, or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person." The government had argued that the word "knowingly" modifies only "transfers, possesses, or uses," and thus the government need not prove that the defendant knew that the means of identification belonged to another person. The Supreme Court disagreed. The Court noted, "[a]s a matter of ordinary English grammar, it seems natural to read the statute's word 'knowingly' as applying to all the subsequently listed elements of the crime."
The Court's order reversed the Eighth Circuit's prior decision in the case. It also overturned decisions in the Fourth and Eleventh Circuits, holding that knowledge was not required.
Read the opinion [1].
Read AILF's press release [2].