Litigants: | Sykes v. United States |
Arguedate: | January 12 |
Argueyear: | 2011 |
Decidedate: | June 9 |
Decideyear: | 2011 |
Fullname: | Sykes v. United States |
Docket: | 09-11311 |
Oralargument: | https://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_09_11311/argument |
Usvol: | 564 |
Uspage: | 1 |
Parallelcitations: | 131 S. Ct. 2267; 180 L. Ed. 2d 60 |
Prior: | Sentence enhancement affirmed, 598 F.3d 334 (7th Cir. 2010); cert. granted, . |
Holding: | Felony vehicle flight, as proscribed by Indiana law, is a violent felony for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act. |
Majority: | Kennedy |
Joinmajority: | Roberts, Breyer, Alito, and Sotomayor |
Concurrence: | Thomas (in judgment) |
Dissent: | Scalia |
Dissent2: | Kagan |
Joindissent2: | Ginsburg |
Overruled: | Johnson v. United States (2015) |
Sykes v. United States, 564 U.S. 1 (2011), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that felony vehicle flight, as proscribed by Indiana law, is a violent felony for purposes of the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).[1] Writing for the majority, Justice Kennedy wrote that vehicle flight requires officers to give chase, resulting in more injuries on average than burglary.[2] Dissenting, Justice Scalia criticized the majority for producing an ad hoc judgment based on vague legislation, suggesting they should declare the residual clause of the law unconstitutionally vague.[3] The court would follow that advice several years later in Johnson v. United States and declare the residual clause unconstitutionally vague.