Consistent Substances, Inconsistent Sentences: United States v. Ruth and Defining “Controlled Substance”

In June 2020, in United States v. Ruth, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit found that any state controlled substance offense—regardless of whether the controlled substance in question is included in the federal Controlled Substances Act—can be a predicate offense for the federal career offender sentencing enhancement. In doing so, the Seventh Circuit deepened an existing circuit split on whether “controlled substance” in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines is limited to federal controlled substances. This Comment argues that the interpretation in Ruth is incorrect because it creates inconsistency in sentencing across jurisdictions for similar defendants. This Comment also proposes a clearer definition of controlled substance offense for the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.