United States v. Molignaro
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13674
| 1st Cir. | 2011Background
- Molignaro pled guilty in 2005 to possession of child pornography and was sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment and 36 months' supervised release with conditions to mitigate risk to children.
- In 2008, the district court tightened the supervised release conditions.
- In 2010, Molignaro violated the supervised release by lying to his probation officer and failing to participate in a sex-offender therapy course after being suspended from the course.
- Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), the district court revoked the supervised release and resentenced Molignaro.
- Guidelines recommended 3–9 months, but the court sentenced him to 22 months to allow time for sex-therapy treatment at Devens, without stating the hypothetical term absent treatment.
- Molignaro challenged the sentence as legally improper and unreasonably long, and the First Circuit vacated and remanded for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May rehabilitation justify imprisonment at resentencing after revocation? | Molignaro argues rehabilitation cannot justify longer imprisonment. | United States argues § 3582(a) allows imprisonment to provide treatment after revocation. | rehabilitation cannot justify prison length at resentencing; vacate and remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2011) (cannot imprison to rehabilitate; no authority to direct prison-based treatment)
- United States v. Anderson, 15 F.3d 278 (2d Cir. 1994) (rehabilitative considerations limited in imprisonment context)
- United States v. Tsosie, 376 F.3d 1210 (10th Cir. 2004) (court decisions on post-revocation imprisonment and rehabilitation)
- United States v. Doe, 617 F.3d 766 (3d Cir. 2010) (jurisdictional treatment considerations in resentencing)