643 F. App'x 25
2d Cir.2016Background
- Defendant Jason Fiume was sentenced in E.D.N.Y. to 10 months’ imprisonment (to run consecutively to a state sentence) and one year of supervised release for a supervised-release violation.
- The written judgment included two special supervised-release conditions at issue: (1) GPS monitoring for a court-determined duration and (2) home detention while on GPS monitoring, with limited exceptions.
- At oral sentencing the court pronounced GPS tracking but did not orally impose a separate home-detention condition.
- District court explained the sentence based on Fiume’s repeated pattern of violating supervision and fixating on his wife (including traveling to Maine to leave a message).
- Fiume appealed, arguing the 10-month consecutive sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable, that home detention was improperly added in the written judgment without oral pronouncement, and that GPS monitoring was substantively unreasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Procedural and substantive reasonableness of 10‑month consecutive sentence | Gov: sentence within Guidelines and justified by repeated violations | Fiume: sentence procedurally and substantively unreasonable | Affirmed — court did not abuse discretion; sentence within permissible range and the district court appropriately focused on breach of trust |
| Inclusion of home‑detention condition in written judgment | Gov: probation recommended home detention; written term valid | Fiume: home detention was not pronounced at oral sentencing and thus cannot be imposed | Vacated in part — home detention deleted from written judgment because oral pronouncement controls |
| Substantive reasonableness of GPS monitoring requirement | Gov: GPS monitoring justified by pattern of conduct toward victim | Fiume: GPS monitoring was substantively unreasonable | Affirmed — GPS monitoring reasonable given defendant’s fixation and conduct |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Aldeen, 792 F.3d 247 (2d Cir.) (standards for abuse-of-discretion review of sentences)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (reasonableness review framework for sentencing)
- United States v. Chu, 714 F.3d 742 (2d Cir.) (procedural-reasonableness standards)
- United States v. Rigas, 583 F.3d 108 (2d Cir.) (substantive-reasonableness discussion)
- United States v. Broxmeyer, 699 F.3d 265 (2d Cir.) (deferential review for substantive reasonableness)
- United States v. Rosario, 386 F.3d 166 (2d Cir.) (oral sentence controls over written judgment)
- United States v. Jacques, 321 F.3d 255 (2d Cir.) (oral pronouncement requirement for conditions of supervision)
- United States v. Marquez, 506 F.2d 620 (2d Cir.) (oral sentence is judgment of the court)
- United States v. Thomas, 299 F.3d 150 (2d Cir.) (remand to delete unpronounced condition)
- United States v. Handakas, 329 F.3d 115 (2d Cir.) (reimposition on remand where appropriate)