Pulsifer v. United States
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Pulsifer v. United States and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Pulsifer v. United States.
In Pulsifer v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed the eligibility criteria for safety-valve relief under federal sentencing law. The Court determined that a defendant must meet all three conditions specified in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1) to qualify for relief. The decision clarified that a defendant is ineligible if they have more than four criminal-history points, a prior three-point offense, or a prior two-point violent offense.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Pulsifer v. United States.
The Court held that a defendant is eligible for safety-valve relief only if they satisfy each of the three conditions outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1).
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Pulsifer v. United States. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Pulsifer v. United States
The case involves the interpretation of statutory conditions for sentencing relief, which relates to fair procedures in sentencing.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)A defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence is eligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U. S. C. § 3553(f )(1) only if he satisfies each of the provision's three conditions.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Pulsifer v. United States
The Court's role in interpreting the statutory text and determining eligibility for relief involves judicial review of legislative provisions.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The text and context of Paragraph (f )(1), as read against the Guidelines, yield just one plausible statutory construction.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Pulsifer v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
A defendant facing a mandatory minimum sentence is eligible for safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(1) only if he satisfies each of the provision's three conditions.
Pulsifer's reading would render Subparagraph A superfluous because a defendant who has a three-point offense under Subparagraph B and a two-point offense under Subparagraph C will always have more than four criminal-history points.
Lenity applies only when a statute is genuinely ambiguous.
