United States v. Staples

Supreme Court of United States (1994)

Defendant: Staples; the defendant was charged with possession of automatic weapon which was not registered. The weapon was modified. The defendant argued that he did not know that the weapon was automatic and he stated that his weapon did not work like an automatic weapon. This argument was rejected at trial court and he was convicted under a statue which carried a possible 10 year prison sentence.

Issue: Did the defendant need actual knowledge about the nature of his weapon in order for him to be convicted?

Holding: Yes

Key Facts: The statue under which the defendant was convicted, did not mention anything about "knowingly" possessing automatic weapon.

Legal Reasoning: The court stated that there are some "public welfare" and "regulatory" crimes where intent is not needed. Furthermore, there are situations where the defendant knows that what he is dealing with is really dangerous and intent is not needed (e.g. U.S. v. Freed involving gernades). But in this case, the actions of the defendant were innocent and the crime he is being charged with does not fit the category of crimes in which the congress would not require intent. The court decided that this crime was a felony and the court was not ready to drop the requirement of mens rea in serious felony cases. Reversed and Remanded.

Note: Rarely will the courts consider a crime that carries long term sentences a strict liability crime.

BACK