592 U.S. 69
SCOTUS2020Background
- Under the UCMJ, offenses "punishable by death" could be prosecuted "at any time without limitation," while other offenses were subject to a 5-year statute of limitations.
- During the relevant period, Article 120 of the UCMJ (rape) included language that rape could be "punished by death."
- The respondents (service members Briggs, Collins, Daniels) were charged years after their alleged rapes (1998, 2000, 2005) and argued the 5-year statute applied.
- Respondents relied on Coker v. Georgia (Eighth Amendment prohibits death for adult rape) to contend rape was not in fact punishable by death when "all applicable law" is considered, so §843(b)’s 5-year limit barred prosecution.
- The Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces agreed with respondents; the Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed, holding "punishable by death" refers to punishments authorized by the UCMJ itself.
- The Supreme Court reasoned context, statutory clarity, and the mismatch between limitations-policy concerns and Eighth Amendment analyses favor treating "punishable by death" as a term of art defined by UCMJ penalty provisions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Meaning of "punishable by death" in the UCMJ statute of limitations | United States: means punishable by death under the UCMJ penalty provisions (term of art) | Respondents (Briggs et al.): means punishable by death after considering all applicable law (including Eighth Amendment) | Court: Adopted Government view; term is defined by UCMJ penalties, so rape prosecutions timely |
| Whether statute of limitations should depend on Eighth Amendment/Article 55 developments | United States: Congress would not tie limitations to unsettled constitutional questions; limitations should be clear and tied to UCMJ text | Respondents/CAAF: the Eighth Amendment (Coker) and Article 55 could render death unavailable, making the 5-year limit applicable | Court: Rejected tying limitations to evolving Eighth Amendment or Article 55; clarity and legislative intent favor UCMJ-defined meaning |
Key Cases Cited
- Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (Eighth Amendment prohibits death penalty for adult rape)
- United States v. Lovasco, 431 U.S. 783 (statutes of limitations provide predictable, legislatively enacted limits on prosecutorial delay)
- Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (Eighth Amendment and evolving standards of decency analysis)
- Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (evolving standards of decency principle under the Eighth Amendment)
- Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (Eighth Amendment evolution regarding intellectually disabled offenders)
- Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (Eighth Amendment prohibits death penalty for juvenile offenders)
- Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. 302 (historical Eighth Amendment holdings contrasted with later developments)
- Burns v. Wilson, 346 U.S. 137 (UCMJ as a uniform code reforming military justice)
- Detroit Timber & Lumber Co. v. United States, 200 U.S. 321 (note that syllabi/headnotes are not part of the Court's opinion)
- Glossip v. Gross, 576 U.S. 863 (discussion of methods of Eighth Amendment interpretation)