Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Descamps v. United States Case Brief

Supreme Court of the United States • 2013 • Docket #868756

Create New Course

Create a new course to organize your saved briefs

Enter the name of the course (e.g., Constitutional Law)

Enter the term when you're taking this course (e.g., Spring 2025)

186 L. Ed. 2d 438 133 S. Ct. 2276 2013 U.S. LEXIS 4698 570 U.S. 254 81 U.S.L.W. 4490 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 343 2013 WL 3064407 Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Constitutional Law Federal Courts

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Try Free for 14 Days

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A court determining if a prior conviction qualifies for a federal sentence enhancement cannot look into the facts of the case if the underlying state statute is “indivisible” and defines the crime more broadly than the generic federal offense.

Legal Significance: Strictly limits the “modified categorical approach” to divisible statutes, reinforcing that federal sentence enhancements under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) must be based on the elements of the crime of conviction, not the defendant’s underlying conduct, to avoid factual inquiries by judges.

Descamps v. United States Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Michael Descamps was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The government sought a sentence enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), which requires three prior convictions for a “violent felony.” One of Descamps’ prior convictions was for burglary under California Penal Code § 459. This statute is broader than the “generic” definition of burglary used for ACCA because it does not require an “unlawful entry” as an element; it criminalizes entering a location with felonious intent, which can include shoplifting. The California statute is also “indivisible” as it contains a single, uniform definition of entry rather than listing alternative elements. The district court, applying a “modified categorical approach,” reviewed the transcript of Descamps’ plea colloquy. It found that the prosecutor had stated the crime involved “breaking and entering,” and Descamps did not object. Based on this factual finding, the court concluded the conviction qualified as a generic burglary and applied the ACCA enhancement. The Ninth Circuit affirmed.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: May a sentencing court apply the modified categorical approach to examine documents from a prior conviction to determine if it qualifies as a predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act when the statute of conviction is indivisible and criminalizes a broader range of conduct than the generic offense?

No. The modified categorical approach is a tool for implementing the categorical Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure do

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

May a sentencing court apply the modified categorical approach to examine documents from a prior conviction to determine if it qualifies as a predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act when the statute of conviction is indivisible and criminalizes a broader range of conduct than the generic offense?

Conclusion

This decision strictly confines the modified categorical approach to divisible statutes, reinforcing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis no

Legal Rule

Under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), a sentencing court may apply Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culp

Legal Analysis

The Court, in an opinion by Justice Kagan, clarified that the modified Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • The modified categorical approach applies only to divisible statutes-those that list
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu f

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?