The Second Circuit joined other courts in finding that the Supreme Court's holding in 'Tapia' "applies upon revocation of supervised release, as well as at the time of the initial sentencing," but that Brandon Lifshitz's sentence was not based on his need for rehabilitation.
April 29, 2013 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
A court sentencing a defendant after revoking his supervised release may not base the sentence on the defendant’s need for rehabilitation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled.
The Second Circuit adopted that rule for supervised release as a logical extension of a 2011 U.S. Supreme Court holding that stated rehabilitation was not a proper consideration at the time the original prison sentence is handed down.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
