Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Salinas Vs. United States

Salinas vs United States

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Apr-24-2006
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/108444

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
05-8400
Subject
Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue
Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Salinas

Respondent

United States

Excerpt

salinas v. united states - 05-8400 (2006) salinas v. united states - 05-8400 (2006) 547 u. s. ____ (2006) 547 u. s. ____ (2006) 547 u. s. ____ (2006) supreme court of the united states jeffrey jerome salinas v. united states on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit no. 05-8400. decided april 24, 2006    per curiam.    the petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit and the motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are granted. the judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the fifth circuit for further consideration.    the fifth circuit concluded that petitioner’s prior conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance constituted a “controlled substance offense” for purposes of united states sentencing commission, guidelines manual §4b1.1(a) (2003). the term “controlled substance offense” is defined in pertinent part, however, as “an offense under federal or state law . . . that prohibits . . . the possession of a controlled substance (or a counterfeit substance) with intent to manufacture, import, export, distribute, or dispense.” §4b1.2(b) (emphasis added). accordingly, the fifth circuit erred in treating petitioner’s conviction for simple possession as a “controlled substance offense.” the solicitor general acknowledges that the fifth circuit incorrectly ruled for the united states on this ground. brief in opposition 8-9.

Full Judgment

Salinas v. United States - 05-8400 (2006)

Salinas v. United States - 05-8400 (2006)

547 U. S. ____ (2006)
547 U. S. ____ (2006)
547 U. S. ____ (2006)
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

JEFFREY JEROME SALINAS v. UNITED STATES

on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fifth circuit

No. 05-8400. Decided April 24, 2006

   Per Curiam.

   The petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis are granted. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded to the Fifth Circuit for further consideration.

   The Fifth Circuit concluded that petitioner’s prior conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance constituted a “controlled substance offense” for purposes of United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual §4B1.1(a) (2003). The term “controlled substance offense” is defined in pertinent part, however, as “an offense under federal or state law . . . that prohibits . . . the possession of a controlled substance (or a counterfeit substance) with intent to manufacture, import, export, distribute, or dispense.” §4B1.2(b) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the Fifth Circuit erred in treating petitioner’s conviction for simple possession as a “controlled substance offense.” The Solicitor General acknowledges that the Fifth Circuit incorrectly ruled for the United States on this ground. Brief in Opposition 8-9.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial