Rutledge v. United States

517 U.S. 292·1996

What the Court Decided

Held that a continuing criminal enterprise conviction and a lesser-included drug conspiracy conviction could not both stand because Congress had not clearly authorized cumulative punishment, despite both statutes containing mandatory and non-suspendable sentences.

Full entry not yet generated. Run npm run enrich-precedents to add it.

Cited In

Barrett v. United States

2025 Term · 24-5774

Key precedent showing that 'notwithstanding any other provision of law' language and mandatory minimum provisions in overlapping drug statutes were insufficient to constitute a clear indication of congressional intent to authorize cumulative punishment.