CASE NOTE
FLORES-FIGUEROAvUNITED STATES: US SUPREME COURT ATTEMPTS TO CLARIFYMENS REA
Flores-Figueroa vUnited States:
US Supreme Court attempts to clarify
mens rea
By Raymond J. Toney*
The Law Office of Raymond J. Toney, Woodland, California
Keywords Mens rea; Knowingly; Statutory construction; Identity theft; United
States
nFlores-Figueroa vUnited States,1the US Supreme Court resolved a conflict
between the federal courts of appeals concerning the proper interpre-
tation of the mens rea element of a federal criminal statute, 18 US Code §
1028A(a)(1), which imposes a two-year mandatory prison sentence for the knowing
use of a means of identification belonging to another person. The root of the
conflict concerned the government’s desire to limit the mens rea element of that
offence so as to avoid having to prove that defendants had knowledge that the
means of identification they used actually belonged to another person. The conflict
was resolved through consideration of the grammatical relationship between the
adverb ‘knowingly’, and the several words that it modified.
18 US Code § 1028A is entitled ‘Aggravated Identify Theft’. Section 1028A(a)(1)
provides:
Whoever, during and in relation to any felony violation enumerated
in subsection (c), knowingly transfers, possesses, or uses, without
lawful authority, a means of identification of another person shall, in
addition to the punishment provided for such felony, be sentenced to
a term of imprisonment of 2 years.
The felony violations enumerated in subs. (c) include offences under the
Immigration and Nationality Act, which were at issue in this case. Flores-Figueroa
had been convicted of two offences involving the misuse of immigration
documents, as well as aggravated identify theft, and was sentenced to 51 months’
doi:10.1350/ijep.2009.13.4.333
330 (2009) 13 E&P 330–335 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF
I
1 129 S Ct 1886 (2009).
* Email: rjtoney@rjtlaw.net.
