Supreme Court· 6/10/2019

Quarles v. United States

Citations

587 U.S. 645
139 S. Ct. 1872
204 L. Ed. 2d 200
2019 U.S. LEXIS 4027

How courts have described this case

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

holding that “remaining-in burglary occurs when the defendant forms the intent to commit a crime at any time while unlawfully remaining in a building or structure”
explaining that generic burglary includes situations in which a “defendant forms the intent to commit a crime at any time while unlawfully remaining in a building or structure”
holding “generic remaining-in burglary occurs . . . when the defendant forms the intent to commit a crime at any time while unlawfully remaining in a building or structure”
noting that a definition of “burglary” that would eliminate many States’ burglary statutes from serving as a predicate offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2018) would “defy common sense” and “defeat Congress’ stated objective”
explaining that, when ACCA was enacted, a majority of states “extend[ed] burglary to cover situations where a person enters a structure lawfully but stays unlawfully—for example, by remaining in a store after closing time without permission to do so”
avoiding an interpretation that would “eliminate[]” “many States’ burglary statutes … as predicate offenses under § 924(e)”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brett Kavanaugh

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Other cases named Quarles v. United States

15 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.