“If, after reference to the language, structure and legislative history of a statute, the intended scope of the statute remains ambiguous, the rule of lenity will apply.”
How later courts described this case
- “If, after reference to the language, structure and legislative history of a statute, the intended scope of the statute remains ambiguous, the rule of lenity will apply.”
- case analyzing validity of state court conviction used in' sentence enhancement and recognizing that presumption of regularity exists even when no transcript of proceedings is available
- "[S]elf-serving statements by a defendant that his conviction was constitutionally infirm are insufficient to overcome the presumption of regularity accorded state convictions."
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
510 U.S. 1180
Morgal et ux.
v.
Pinal County Board of Supervisors et al.
No. 93-7436.
Supreme Court of United States.
March 7, 1994.
1
Appeal from the C. A. 9th Cir.
2
Certiorari denied. Reported below: 993 F. 2d 883 .