## Facts

- Marcus Andrew Burrage was prosecuted in federal court for distributing heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
- The government sought an enhanced penalty under § 841(b)(1)(C) on the theory that a user’s death “resulted from” use of heroin Burrage distributed, which increased the sentencing range to a 20-year mandatory minimum up to life.
- The decedent, Joshua Banka, had ingested multiple drugs during an extended binge, including heroin supplied by Burrage.
- Medical experts testified that heroin was a contributing factor and that death would have been less likely without heroin, but they could not say Banka would have lived absent the heroin.
- Burrage moved for acquittal on the enhancement, arguing the government failed to prove heroin was a but-for cause of death.
- The district court denied the motion and instructed the jury that it was sufficient if heroin was a “contributing cause” of death.
- The jury convicted on the “death results” count, and the court imposed the 20-year mandatory minimum; the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether § 841(b)(1)(C)’s “death results” enhancement requires proof that use of the distributed drug was a but-for cause of death, rather than merely a contributing cause.
2. Whether the “death results” fact is an element of the aggravated offense that must be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
- The Court held that, at least where the distributed drug is not an independently sufficient cause of death, § 841(b)(1)(C) requires but-for causation.
- The Court also held that because the enhancement increases the statutory minimum and maximum punishment, the “death results” fact is an element that must be found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Because the jury was instructed on a contributing-cause standard and the evidence did not establish but-for causation, the enhancement could not stand.

## Legal Principles

- When a statutory phrase like “results from” is undefined, it is ordinarily read to require actual causation: the harm would not have occurred but for the defendant’s conduct.
- For § 841(b)(1)(C), proof that the drug was merely a contributing factor to a death involving multiple drugs is insufficient where the drug was not itself independently sufficient to cause death.
- Any fact that increases a defendant’s statutory minimum or maximum sentence is an element of the offense and must be submitted to the jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
- The Court left open how § 841(b)(1)(C) applies in a multiple-sufficient-causes scenario, where separate factors could each independently produce the death.

## Conclusion

The Court limited § 841(b)(1)(C)’s “death results” enhancement to cases where the government proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the victim would not have died but for use of the drug the defendant distributed (absent an independently sufficient cause), rejecting a contributing-cause jury standard and treating the enhancement-triggering fact as an element of the aggravated offense.


Burrage v. United States, 571 U.S. 204 (2014)