Rutledge v. United States
517 U.S. 292 (1996)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A conviction for conspiracy under 21 U.S.C. § 846 is a lesser included offense of conducting a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) under 21 U.S.C. § 848. Therefore, a defendant cannot be convicted and punished for both offenses when they are based on the same underlying criminal agreement.
Facts:
- From 1988 until December 1990, petitioner Edward Rutledge organized and supervised a criminal enterprise that distributed cocaine in Warren County, Illinois.
- The enterprise involved Rutledge working 'in concert with at least five (5) other persons.'
- Rutledge occupied a supervisory position over the other members of the enterprise.
- The same criminal agreement formed the basis for both a conspiracy charge and the 'in concert' element of the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) charge against Rutledge.
Procedural Posture:
- Edward Rutledge was indicted in U.S. District Court on charges of conspiracy to distribute controlled substances (§ 846) and conducting a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (§ 848).
- A jury found Rutledge guilty on both counts.
- The District Court entered judgment of conviction on both counts and imposed concurrent life sentences, along with a $50 special assessment for each count.
- Rutledge, as appellant, appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that concurrent sentences were permissible so long as the total punishment did not exceed the CCE maximum.
- The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a conflict among the Circuit Courts of Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does federal law permit a court to enter separate judgments of conviction and impose concurrent sentences for both the offense of conspiracy (21 U.S.C. § 846) and the offense of Continuing Criminal Enterprise (21 U.S.C. § 848) when the same criminal agreement underlies both charges?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice Stevens
No. A conspiracy to distribute controlled substances under 21 U.S.C. § 846 is a lesser included offense of the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) offense under 21 U.S.C. § 848, and Congress did not authorize cumulative punishment for these two offenses. Applying the Blockburger test, the Court determined that the CCE statute requires proof of several elements not found in the conspiracy statute (e.g., supervising five or more people, obtaining substantial income). However, the conspiracy statute does not require proof of any element that is not also part of the CCE offense. The Court definitively holds that the 'in concert' element of CCE requires proof of a conspiratorial agreement, just as § 846 does. Therefore, conspiracy is a lesser included offense of CCE. A second conviction, even with a concurrent sentence, constitutes impermissible punishment due to adverse collateral consequences and the imposition of a mandatory special assessment. The Court found no clear congressional intent to overcome the presumption against multiple punishments for the same offense, so one of the convictions must be vacated.
Analysis:
This decision resolves a significant circuit split, establishing a uniform national rule that a defendant cannot be convicted of both CCE and the underlying § 846 conspiracy. By definitively holding that § 846 conspiracy is a lesser included offense of § 848 CCE, the Court solidified a principle it had only assumed in the past. The case reinforces the doctrine from Ball v. United States, confirming that a superfluous conviction itself is a form of punishment due to its potential collateral consequences, even without additional prison time. Following this precedent, when a jury returns guilty verdicts for both CCE and a lesser included conspiracy, trial courts are required to vacate the conspiracy conviction.
