Supreme Court· 6/26/2015

Johnson v. United States

Citations

576 U.S. 591
135 S. Ct. 2551
192 L. Ed. 2d 569
2015 U.S. LEXIS 4251
83 U.S.L.W. 4576
25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 459

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that criminal culpability can depend on \matter of degree\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
holding that a nearly identical residual clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act was unconstitutionally vague
holding that laws are not unconstitutionally vague merely because they “call for the application of a qualitative standard such as ‘substantial risk’ to real-world conduct”
holding that the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) is unconstitutionally vague
holding that the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) is unconstitutionally vague
holding that imposing an increased sentence under the residual clause of the ACC “violates the Constitution’s guarantee of due process”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scaliadelivered, Alito

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

1,713 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

88 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Johnson v. United States

1,544 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.