High court defines gun 'use' with drugs

WASHINGTON, Dec. 10 (UPI) -- The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Monday trading drugs for a firearm does not equal the "use" of a weapon in drug trafficking, which would mean a higher sentence.

The unanimous judgment came in the case of a Louisiana man, Michael Watson, who was indicted for trading an undercover officer OxyContin for a semiautomatic pistol. Watson pleaded guilty but reserved the right to challenge the facts of his indictment.

U.S. law imposes a minimum sentence, depending on the facts of the crime, for anyone who "uses" a firearm during drug trafficking. Any violation of the provision results in a mandatory minimum sentence of five years; if the firearm is brandished, the minimum goes up to seven years, and if the firearm is discharged, the minimum jumps to 10 years.

Monday, the high court said trading drugs for a pistol does not fit the definition of "use." Writing for the court, Justice David Souter said federal prosecutors were trying to "trump ... ordinary English" in the law.

The Watson case is the third in a series of cases dealing with the "use" of a firearm during drug trafficking. In 1995's Bailey vs. United States, the justices said just having a weapon nearby did not fit the definition. But in 1993's Smith vs. United States, they said trading a gun for drugs (the reverse of Watson's case) did constitute the "use" of a firearm in drug trafficking.

(Watson vs. United States 06-571)