United States v. Burns
418 F. App'x 209
| 4th Cir. | 2011Background
- Burns, convicted Jan 9, 2004 in Virginia state court of possession of obscene material; registered as a sex offender in Virginia on Jan 23, 2004.
- SORNA was enacted July 27, 2006, creating federal registration requirements and penalties for failure to register.
- Congress delegated to the Attorney General the authority to specify applicability of SORNA to pre-SORNA offenders and to prescribe rules for their registration (42 U.S.C. § 16913(d)).
- The Attorney General issued a rule on Oct 28, 2007 applying SORNA to all offenders, including pre-enactment offenders.
- Burns relocated to California in Feb 2008; arrested July 2, 2008; indicted Feb 2009 in the Western District of Virginia for failure to register; pled guilty but reserved appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Congress unconstitutionally delegated authority to apply SORNA retroactively. | Burns argues the retroactive application is a nondelegable legislative function. | Burns contends the AG’s retroactive application exceeds delegated authority. | No; intelligible principle supports delegation, upholding retroactive application. |
| Whether applying SORNA retroactively violates the Ex Post Facto Clause. | Burns contends post-enactment punishment for pre-enactment offense is unconstitutional. | Post-enactment conduct (moving to CA and failing to register) triggers liability under SORNA. | Not ex post facto; punishment for post-enactment conduct consistent with penalties under § 2250. |
| Whether venue in the Western District of Virginia was proper. | Footing venue where offense occurred, i.e., California. | Venue should lie where the offense was completed (California). | Venue proper under 18 U.S.C. § 3237(a) because offense began in VA and completed in CA. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hatcher, 560 F.3d 222 (4th Cir.2009) (delegation limited by SORNA provisions and §16913(d))
- Guzman, 591 F.3d 83 (2d Cir.2010) (highly circumscribed delegated authority under SORNA)
- Whaley, 577 F.3d 254 (5th Cir.2009) (SORNA intelligible principle guides application)
- Ambert, 561 F.3d 1202 (11th Cir.2009) (broad policy goals guide application of SORNA)
- Gould, 568 F.3d 459 (4th Cir.2009) (ex post facto concerns tied to post-enactment conduct)
- Shenandoah, 595 F.3d 151 (3d Cir.2010) (ex post facto considerations in SORNA context)
- May, 535 F.3d 912 (8th Cir.2008) (ex post facto analysis in SORNA context)
- Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361 (U.S. 1989) (intelligible principle for delegated legislative power)