Flores-Figueroa v. United States | |
---|---|
Argued February 25, 2009 Decided May 4, 2009 | |
Full case name | Ignacio Carlos Flores-Figueroa, Petitioner v. United States |
Docket no. | 08-108 |
Citations | 556 U.S. 646 (more) 129 S. Ct. 1886; 173 L. Ed. 2d 853; 2009 U.S. LEXIS 3305 |
Case history | |
Prior | Defendant convicted (S.D. Iowa 2008); affirmed, 274 F. App'x 501 (8th Cir. 2008); cert. granted, 555 U.S. 969 (2008). |
Holding | |
The "knowingly" requirement for the federal crime of aggravated identity theft requires that the defendant knew that the false identification he used actually belonged to another person. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Breyer, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg |
Concurrence | Scalia (in judgment), joined by Thomas |
Concurrence | Alito (in judgment) |
Laws applied | |
Part of a series on |
Chicanos and Mexican Americans |
---|
Flores-Figueroa v. United States, 556 U.S. 646 (2009), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, holding that the law enhancing the sentence for identity theft requires proof that an individual knew that the identity card or number he had used belonged to another, actual person.[1] Simply using a Social Security Number is not sufficient connection to another individual.