Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Efrain Lora v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, No. 20-33 · judgment February 15, 2022
Before the decision, about 4.6× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for counsel who has won certiorari before, a Second Circuit decision below, and a circuit split argued in the petition.
Question presented
District courts have discretion to impose either consecutive or concurrent sentences unless a statute mandates otherwise. 18 U.S.C. § 3584(a). Section 924(c)(l)(D)(ii) of Title 18 includes such a mandate, but only for sentences imposed "under this subsection." Efrain Lora was convicted and sentenced under a different subsection, Section 924(j), which does not include such a mandate. Lora therefore argued that the district court had discretion to impose concurrent sentences because Section 924(j) creates a separate offense not subject to Section 924(c)(l)(D)(ii); yet the Second Circuit ruled that the district court was required to impose consecutive sentences because Section 924(j) counts as "under" Section 924(c). This Court, however, has held that provisions like Sections 924(c) and 924(j) define separate offenses, not the same offense, because they set forth different potential punishments based on different elements. Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99, 100 (2013). Four circuit courts have agreed with the Second Circuit's conclusion, although for distinct reasons (the Third, Fourth, Eighth, and Ninth). At least two circuits have disagreed (the Tenth and Eleventh). In addition to the numerous appellate decisions, this issue recurs in district courts frequently, because Section 924 is one of the most frequently charged federal criminal statutes. The question presented is: Whether 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l)(D)(ii), which provides that "no term of imprisonment imposed ... under this subsection shall run concurrently with any other term of imprisonment," is triggered when a defendant is convicted and sentenced under 18 U.S.C. § 924(j).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Lawrence David Rosenberg
Jones Day
For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 3 conferences
Amicus briefs
2 merits
(2 supporting pet./neither)
Argument & decision
Argued March 28, 2023 — Lawrence D. Rosenberg · Erica L. Ross. Audio and transcript
Decided June 16, 2023. Opinion by Jackson.
Proceedings
- Jul 18 2023Judgment issued.
- Jul 17 2023Sealed records returned to the USDC-Southern District of New York (1 envelope).
- Jun 16 2023Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Jackson, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
- Mar 28 2023Argued. For petitioner: Lawrence D. Rosenberg, Washington, D. C. For respondent: Erica L. Ross, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C.
- Mar 17 2023Reply of petitioner Efrain Lora filed. (Distributed)
- Mar 10 2023Sealed records received from the USDC-Southern District of New York (1 envelope). The remaining record is available on PACER.
- Feb 21 2023Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner GRANTED.
- Feb 21 2023Brief of respondent United States filed. (Distributed)
- Feb 13 2023CIRCULATED
- Feb 06 2023All records from the USCA-2nd Circuit were transmitted electronically (including sealed materials). Record request forwarded to the USDC-Southern District of New York.
- Feb 03 2023Record requested from the U.S.C.A. for the Second Circuit.
- Jan 31 2023SET FOR ARGUMENT on Tuesday, March 28, 2023.
- Jan 27 2023Brief amicus curiae of American Bar Association filed.
- Jan 27 2023Brief amicus curiae of The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers filed.
- Jan 20 2023Brief of petitioner Efrain Lora filed.
- Jan 20 2023Motion to dispense with printing the joint appendix filed by petitioner Efrain Lora.
- Dec 09 2022Petition GRANTED.
- Dec 05 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/9/2022.
- Nov 15 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/2/2022.
- Nov 14 2022Reply of petitioner Efrain Lora filed. (Distributed)
- Oct 28 2022Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
- Sep 23 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including October 28, 2022.
- Sep 22 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 28, 2022 to October 28, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Aug 24 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 28, 2022.
- Aug 23 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 29, 2022 to September 28, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Jul 29 2022Response Requested. (Due August 29, 2022)
- Jul 27 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2022.
- Jul 22 2022Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Jul 15 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 18, 2022)
- May 09 2022Application (21A693) granted by Justice Sotomayor extending the time to file until July 15, 2022.
- May 05 2022Application (21A693) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from May 16, 2022 to July 15, 2022, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.