## Facts

- Federal law formerly imposed crack-cocaine mandatory minimums reflecting a 100-to-1 crack/powder ratio (5-year minimum at 5g crack; 10-year minimum at 50g crack).
- The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (effective Aug. 3, 2010) reduced the disparity to 18-to-1 by raising the crack quantities triggering the 5- and 10-year minimums to 28g and 280g, respectively, and directed prompt conforming Guideline amendments.
- Corey Hill sold 53g of crack in 2007 but was sentenced in December 2010; the district court applied the pre-FSA 10-year mandatory minimum.
- Edward Dorsey sold 5.5g of crack in 2008; due to a prior drug conviction, the district court applied a pre-FSA 10-year mandatory minimum at a September 2010 sentencing.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed both sentences, holding the FSA did not apply to defendants whose offenses predated Aug. 3, 2010.

## Issues

1. Whether the Fair Sentencing Act’s reduced crack-cocaine mandatory minimums apply to defendants who committed offenses before Aug. 3, 2010 but were sentenced after that date.
2. Whether the general saving statute, 1 U.S.C. § 109, requires continued use of pre-FSA mandatory minimums absent an express retroactivity provision.

## Decision

- The Court held (5–4) that the Fair Sentencing Act’s new, lower mandatory minimums apply to post-Act sentencing of pre-Act offenders.
- The Court vacated the judgments and remanded for resentencing under the FSA’s reduced mandatory minimum framework.
- The Court concluded that Congress’s intent for post-Act sentencings to use the new minimums was sufficiently shown by statutory context and “fair implication,” notwithstanding 1 U.S.C. § 109.

## Legal Principles

- For defendants sentenced on or after Aug. 3, 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act’s reduced crack-cocaine mandatory minimums apply even if the offense occurred before the Act’s effective date.
- The general saving statute (1 U.S.C. § 109) establishes a default rule against applying reduced penalties to pre-enactment conduct, but that default can be displaced by congressional intent shown by necessary, clear, or fair implication.
- In federal sentencing, a strong background practice applies new sentencing rules to defendants not yet sentenced, particularly where Congress directs prompt, coordinated adjustments to the Sentencing Guidelines and mandatory minimum structure.

## Conclusion

The Court required federal courts to apply the Fair Sentencing Act’s lower crack-cocaine mandatory minimums at sentencings occurring after the Act’s effective date, even for earlier offenses, based on congressional intent inferred from the Act’s structure, its directive for rapid Guideline conformity, and established sentencing practice.


Dorsey v. United States, 567 U.S. 260 (2012)