Delligatti v. United States

Background

Salvatore Delligatti, a member of a New York organized‑crime group, was convicted after recruiting gang members, supplying a loaded revolver, and plotting to kill a suspected informant. Federal prosecutors charged him under a law that increases sentences when someone uses or carries a firearm during a “crime of violence.” The indictment relied on attempted second‑degree murder under New York law as the predicate offense; New York law allows murder to be committed by either action or by failing to perform a legal duty.

Reasoning

The Court asked whether intentionally causing injury or death by omission counts as the “use of physical force” under the federal gun‑enhancement law. Relying on prior decisions and historical practice, the majority held that deliberately causing bodily harm necessarily involves the use of physical force, even when the harm results from a purposeful failure to act. The Court therefore concluded New York’s second‑degree murder (and the related racketeering charge) qualifies as a “crime of violence” for the statute and affirmed the conviction.

Real world impact

This ruling means prosecutors can treat offenses that intentionally cause harm by omission as predicate “crimes of violence” when applying the §924(c) firearm enhancement. People who plan or enable lethal harm and involve firearms face the statute’s mandatory consecutive prison term. The decision is not limited to one State and rests on a broad reading of “use of force,” though it applies where the conduct is knowing or intentional.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justice Jackson, dissented, arguing the statute’s text requires active, violent physical acts and does not cover inaction-based crimes; the dissent urged a narrower reading and the rule of lenity.