United States v. Martini (Cassesse)
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 14197
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Cassesse was originally sentenced in 1991 to a lifetime term of supervised release after multiple heroin offenses.
- In 2007 he committed a new crime (racketeering) while on supervised release and pled guilty to the violation.
- The district court sentenced him to 90 months for racketeering and three years of supervised release for the violation, with the latter to run after the racketeering term.
- The court then revoked his prior lifetime supervised release and imposed a new lifetime term of supervised release in addition to the prison term.
- Cassesse argued that the prison term for the violation should reduce the renewed lifetime term under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h) and related authorities, but the court did not subtract the 12 months.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the lifetime term of supervised release can be reduced by the prison term for the violation. | Cassesse: yes, reduce lifetime term by 12 months. | Cassesse (government’s position): under §3583(h) subtraction applies to renewals; lifetime term should be reduced. | No, lifetime term not reduced; unadjusted lifetime term valid. |
| How the court should explain the sentence under 3553(a) and 3553(c). | Cassesse contends the court failed to adequately explain the sentence. | Govt.: explanation was sufficient given range and intertwined analysis. | Explanation adequate; plain error not established. |
| What standard of review applies to the statutory interpretation and sentencing challenges. | Cassesse expects de novo review on statutory interpretation and plain error on procedure. | Govt. agrees de novo for interpretation; plain error review for procedural claims where preserved. | Decisions reviewed de novo for the statutory issue; plain error review applied to procedural claim, not satisfied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694 (2000) (approval of renewed term of supervised release and reduction concept under 3583(h))
- United States v. Smith, 354 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2003) (discusses § 3583(e)(3) and related standards)
- United States v. Verkhoglyad, 516 F.3d 122 (2d Cir. 2008) (standard of review for sentencing reasonableness on § 3553(a) claims)
- United States v. Villafuerte, 502 F.3d 204 (2d Cir. 2007) (plain error review for unpreserved sentencing claims; explanation sufficiency)
- United States v. Fleming, 397 F.3d 95 (2d Cir. 2005) (when guidelines applied, explanation need not be lengthy)
- United States v. Rausch, 638 F.3d 1296 (10th Cir. 2011) (life-terms and subtraction concept considerations)
- United States v. Shorty, 159 F.3d 312 (7th Cir. 1998) (discussion of life-term subtraction concepts)