United States v. Becky Holman
2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18653
| 7th Cir. | 2016Background
- Holman pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin and received an initial 36-month sentence, later vacated and remanded for resentencing.
- On remand, the district court sentenced Holman to 33 months after identifying that the death element should not influence the resentencing.
- Investigations tied Holman’s drug distribution to a heroin overdose death (Henschel) but the remand prevented consideration of death in the new calculation.
- At resentencing, the court weighed 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, Holman’s addiction history, and potential for rehabilitation, ultimately citing rehabilitation as a consideration alongside deterrence and public safety.
- Holman objected, arguing the court lengthened the sentence to promote rehabilitation, while the government argued any error was not preserved for de novo review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tapia prohibits lengthening a sentence to promote rehabilitation | Holman argues the district court lengthened her term to push rehabilitation | The government contends any Tapia issue was not properly preserved and no plain error occurred | No plain error; affirmed the 33-month sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- Tapia v. United States, 564 U.S. 319 (2011) (prohibits lengthening a sentence to promote rehabilitation but allows discussing rehabilitation benefits in prison)
- Lucas v. United States, 670 F.3d 784 (7th Cir. 2012) (courts may discuss rehab within prison and discuss treatment programs without lengthening the sentence)
- Guajardo-Martinez v. United States, 635 F.3d 1056 (7th Cir. 2011) (plain-error standard for unpreserved claims)
- Fluker v. United States, 698 F.3d 988 (7th Cir. 2012) (preservation of objections and standard of review at sentencing)