United States v. Powell

Background

A woman in Tacoma received unsolicited packages containing shotguns and a later package with a sawed-off shotgun. The return address and handwriting tied the second package to the defendant, who was tried and convicted for mailing a firearm said to be "capable of being concealed on the person" under a federal statute and sentenced to two years in prison. A federal appeals court overturned the conviction, holding that the statute was too vague as applied to sawed-off shotguns.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court first asked whether the statute’s language about "firearms capable of being concealed on the person" includes a 22-inch sawed-off shotgun. The Court concluded that the plain words and the law’s purpose support applying the ban to such a weapon, rejecting the argument that the list should be narrowly read only to cover pistols and revolvers. The Court also addressed the vagueness claim and held that, judged against the actual facts here, the statute gave fair warning that mailing the sawed-off shotgun was illegal, so the law was not unconstitutionally vague.

Real world impact

The ruling allows prosecutors to pursue convictions under the nonmailable-weapons statute for mailings of weapons the jury could find concealable, including some sawed-off shotguns. It signals that the statute will survive vagueness challenges when the facts show a weapon could be concealed, giving clearer notice to people handling such mailings.

Dissents or concurrances

A separate opinion agreed the law was not vague but argued the statute should be read more narrowly to cover only weapons similar in size to pistols and revolvers, which would limit prosecutions for larger weapons.