In Lora v. United States, decided June 16, 2023, the Supreme Court ruled that the bar on imposition of concurrent sentences in 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(D)(ii) does not apply to a sentence for a 924(j) conviction. Thus, the district court has the discretion to run a 924(j) sentence either concurrently with or consecutively to a sentence for another offense.
The Court reasoned that by its terms the consecutive sentence mandate of 924(c) is limited to sentences imposed “under this subsection.” Quite obviously, 924(j) is a separate subsection. It incorporates some of the offense elements of 924(c) but not its penalty provision. Accordingly, the concurrent sentences bar of 924(c) does not apply to a sentence imposed under 924(j).
This decision unanimously reversed the Second Circuit in an opinion by Justice Jackson.
Comments are closed.