When drugs cause death
Marcus Andrew Burrage v. United States
In brief
The Supreme Court overturned the Eighth Circuit’s ruling and required proof that Burrage’s heroin was necessary to the death when it could not cause death on its own.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 9-0 · January 27, 2014 · Opinion by Justice Scalia
- What it’s about
- When the heroin Marcus Burrage supplied was not independently enough to cause death, the Supreme Court required proof it was necessary to the death (a but-for cause), not merely a contributing factor.
- Who it affects
- In federal cases under §841(b)(1)(C), prosecutors must show the distributed drug was a necessary cause when it was not enough on its own to cause death or serious injury.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
It overturned the Eighth Circuit’s ruling and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded), but did not decide whether foreseeability or proximate cause is also required.
A person died with multiple drugs in their system, and the jury could convict Burrage if the heroin he supplied contributed to the death.
The case concerned a federal law that increases penalties when drug distribution causes death or serious bodily injury.
Question presented
1. Does the crime of distribution of drugs causing death require a foreseeability or proximate cause requirement? 2. Can a defendant be found guilty of distribution of drugs causing death when the jury instructions for that crime allow conviction if the heroin "contributed to" death by "mixed drug intoxication" instead of being the sole cause of death?
What the Court decided
Holding
At least where use of the drug distributed by the defendant is not an independently sufficient cause of the victim’s death or serious bodily injury, a defendant cannot be liable for penalty enhancement under §841(b)(1)(C) unless such use is a but-for cause of the death or injury. 687 F. 3d 1015, reversed and remanded.
- Result
- Reversed
The Court's reasoning
The Court said that when the drug was not enough on its own to cause death or serious injury, it had to be a necessary cause. In other words, the death or injury would not have happened without that drug.
The vote
- Joined the judgment
- Concurred in a separate opinion
- Wrote an opinion
- Concurring · 2agreed with the result, wrote separately
- Ginsburgwrote separately
- Sotomayor
What's next
The case returns to the Eighth Circuit for further proceedings under the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Documents
Opinions
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Show 4 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Opinion added: Burrage
More questions
- Did heroin have to be the only cause of death?
- No. But if it could not cause death on its own, the jury had to find the death would not have happened without it.
- What if the drug could cause death by itself?
- The Court limited its ruling to cases where the drug was not enough on its own; it did not set out a rule for the other situation.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.