Tapia v. US
SimpleOriginal

Summary

In this 2011 case the Court held that under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(a), sentencing courts may not impose or lengthen a prison term to promote a defendant’s rehabilitation.

2011 | Federal Juristiction

Tapia v. US

Keywords 18 U.S.C. § 3582(a); sentencing; prison term; rehabilitation; defendant; court; 2011 case; prison sentence; U.S. Code; legal case
Open Case as PDF

2011 Case: Limitations on Sentencing for Rehabilitation

The 2011 ruling established that 18 U.S.C. § 3582(a) prohibits courts from imposing or extending prison sentences with the primary goal of facilitating offender rehabilitation.

Open Case as PDF

2011 Case on Sentencing and Rehabilitation

The 2011 court decision clarified that 18 U.S.C. § 3582(a) prohibits the use of prison sentences, or their extensions, to primarily facilitate a defendant's rehabilitation. The ruling established a legal precedent against the consideration of rehabilitative goals as a primary factor when determining sentence length. This interpretation restricts judicial discretion in sentencing, focusing instead on other legally mandated considerations.

Open Case as PDF

2011 Court Ruling on Sentencing

A 2011 court decision clarified that judges cannot give longer prison sentences, or add to existing ones, just to help a criminal change their behavior. This ruling was based on a section of US law (18 U.S.C. § 3582(a)). The law prevents judges from focusing on rehabilitation as the primary reason for the length of a sentence.

Open Case as PDF

Summary

In 2011, a court decided that judges can't give longer prison sentences just to help prisoners get better. The law (18 U.S.C. § 3582(a)) says so.

Open Case as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

564 US 319 (2011)

Highlights