| Litigants: | Mathis v. United States |
| Decidedate: | June 23 |
| Decideyear: | 2016 |
| Fullname: | Mathis v. United States |
| Usvol: | 579 |
| Uspage: | ___ |
| Docket: | 15-6092 |
| Holding: | If a state law defines a crime more broadly than the common understanding of that crime, a conviction under that state law cannot be used as a sentencing enhancement under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act. |
| Majority: | Kagan |
| Concurrence: | Kennedy |
| Concurrence2: | Thomas |
| Dissent: | Breyer |
| Joindissent: | Ginsberg |
| Dissent2: | Alito |
| Lawsapplied: | Armed Career Criminal Act |
Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that if a state law defines a crime more broadly than the common understanding of that crime, a conviction under that state law cannot be used as a sentencing enhancement under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act.[1]
The conviction at issue was under Iowa's burglary law, which criminalized unlawful entry into "any building, structure, [or] land, water, or air vehicle." To the Court, the common understanding of "burglary" was unlawful entry into a "building or other structure."