United States v. Trotter
| Decision Date | 12 July 2018 |
| Docket Number | 15-CR-382 |
| Citation | 321 F.Supp.3d 337 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Tyran TROTTER, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
Lauren Howard Elbert, United States Attorney's Office, 271 Cadman Plz E, Brooklyn, NY 11201, 718-254-6076, for United States of America
Jeremy Schneider, Rothman, Schneider, Soloway & Stern, P.C., 100 Lafayette Street, Suite 501, New York, NY 10013, 212-571-5500, for Tyran Trotter
AMENDED MEMORANDUM & ORDER
This case raises serious issues about sentencing generally, and supervised release for marijuana users specifically: Are we imposing longer terms than are needed for effective supervised release? Should we stop punishing supervisees for a marijuana addiction or habit?
After revisiting and reconsidering these issues, I conclude: (1) I, like other trial judges, have in many cases imposed longer periods of supervised release than needed, and I, like other trial judges, have failed to terminate supervised release early in many cases where continuing supervision presents such a burden as to reduce the probability of rehabilitation; and (2) I, like other trial judges, have provided unnecessary conditions of supervised release and unjustifiably punished supervisees for their marijuana addiction, even though marijuana is widely used in the community and is an almost unbreakable addiction or habit for some. As a result of these errors in our sentencing practice, money and the time of our probation officers are wasted, and supervisees are unnecessarily burdened.
In summary, in this and my future cases I will: (1) impose shorter terms of supervised release as needed; (2) give greater consideration to the appropriateness of conditions; (3) provide for earlier termination where indicated; and (4) avoid violations of supervised release and punishment by incarceration merely for habitual marijuana use.
The purpose of federal supervised release is to assist people who have served prison terms with rehabilitation and reintegration into the law-abiding community. The United States Probation Department ("Probation Department") monitors individuals on supervised release and can help a supervisee with his or her reintegration into lawful society by providing drug treatment, mental health counseling, vocational training, and many other services to help reduce recidivism.
Violating a condition of supervised release can lead to—and in instances must lead to—additional incarceration. This situation can trap some defendants, particularly substances abusers, in a cycle where they oscillate between supervised release and prison.
[This is] the sinister side of probation the place where the promise of redemption is subverted by a lurking punitiveness.... Sanctions imposed for probation violations ... frequently lead to disproportionate sentences, with probation merely becoming a staging area for eventual imprisonment.
Nora V. Demleitner, How to Change the Philosophy and Practice of Probation and Supervised Release: Data Analytics, Cost Control, Focus on Reentry, and a Clear Mission , 28 Fed. Sent'g Rep. 231, 232 (2016) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Connections with family and community organizations—religious or secular—are an aid to, and indication of, rehabilitation and reentry into normal, lawful life. See generally Mark T. Berg & Beth M. Huebner, Reentry and the Ties That Bind: An Examination of Social Ties, Employment, and Recidivism , 28 Just. Q. 382 (2011). Every time a connection is broken with the world outside of prison, by unnecessary incarceration following violations of supervised release, it probably becomes more difficult to reconnect. The court must consider such factors in finding violations during supervised release. Cf. Reentry Program – Recidivism Reduction , Aleph Institute (June 25, 2018), https://aleph-institute.org/wp/programs/reentry-services/ (offering reentry programs and community connections to reduce recidivism).
The Probation Department in this court merits high praise for its work. Our probation officers do a difficult job well; often they have a helpful impact on criminal defendants' lives. Recognizing the possibility of over-supervision, our Probation Department has now taken measures to reduce supervision burdens by (1) tapering off supervision over time; (2) creating a "low intensity" supervision program; and (3) recommending early termination when warranted.
The resources of the Probation Department are limited. Cf. U.S. Courts, Probation Offices Look to Technology to Offset Budget, Staffing Reductions (Apr. 18, 2012) (discussing innovative measures taken by the Probation Department to offset budgetary concerns). The Probation Department should be focused on assisting those defendants with the potential for success, not on those doomed to fail.
The significance of terms and conditions of supervised release is often ignored when sentencing. See generally Christine S. Scott-Hayward, Shadow Sentencing: The Imposition of Federal Supervised Release , 18 Berkeley J. Crim. L. 180, 190 (2013). At the sentencing hearing, the term of supervised release is seldom discussed; defense counsel, Assistant United States Attorneys, and the court assume it will be imposed for a significant period (usually three or five years). The sentencing hearing centers on the incarceration term. Going forward, more careful attention should be given to the potential of supervised release, and its duration, to help—or to prevent—rehabilitation. Proposals of the American Law Institute to improve all aspects of sentencing are excellent, but generally beyond the powers of a trial judge to implement. See American Law Institute, Model Penal Code: Sentencing (Proposed Final Draft), § 6.09, at 197 (2017).
Without addressing the advantages and dangers of the change in criminal laws on smoking marijuana, it is obvious that marijuana use, through law, policy, and social custom, is becoming increasingly accepted by society. Many people from all walks of life now use marijuana without fear of adverse legal consequences. In New York, where marijuana policy is evolving in favor of decriminalization, serious racial and social-class disparities exist in the enforcement of anti-marijuana laws. See, e.g. , Benjamin Mueller, Robert Gebeloff, & Sahil Chinoy, Surest Way to Face Marijuana Charges in New York: Be Black or Hispanic , N.Y. Times, May 13, 2018, at A1 (reporting that African Americans are arrested at eight times the rate of White people in New York City despite equal marijuana usage rates).
Yet, marijuana remains illegal for all purposes under federal law. See Silvia Irimescu, Marijuana Legalization: How Government Stagnation Hinders Legal Evolution and Harms A Nation , 50 Gonz. L. Rev. 241, 249 (2015) ; but cf. Sadie Gurman & Natalie Andrews, Jeff Sessions Struggles to Get Planned Marijuana Crackdown Going , Wall St. J., June 10, 2018 (discussion of a "bipartisan bill" which would prevent the federal government from interfering with state laws legalizing marijuana). Marijuana use violates a mandatory condition of federal supervised release and can require mandatory incarceration for some supervisees. See infra Section III(B)-(E)
Effectively, courts are faced with a choice: imprison a marijuana user on supervised release or cut short supervision, forcing an attempt at further rehabilitation on the supervisee's own. Many men and women who have terms of incarceration imposed by this court are seeking to live productive, law-abiding lives, but are derailed by their marijuana addiction.
Like many federal trial judges, I have been terminating supervision for "violations" by individuals with long-term marijuana habits who are otherwise rehabilitated. No useful purpose is served through the continuation of supervised release for many defendants whose only illegal conduct is following the now largely socially acceptable habit of marijuana use. The cost to tax-payers of long, repeating sentences and extended, unnecessary supervised release is substantial.
Tyran Trotter, like many of his peers who fall into crime, comes from a broken home. He never knew his father. His mother struggles with drug addiction. His brother was apparently murdered. At fourteen he was placed in foster care. By sixteen he had half-a-dozen arrests on his record. He was convicted of a federal drug distribution charge and sentenced to two years imprisonment before he could legally drink alcohol. Now twenty-two years old, Trotter is on federal supervised release...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Peguero
... ... granted a reprieve. Instead, she is imposing a new ... term of imprisonment. See Johnson , 529 U.S. at 715 ... ("the ordinary meaning of revoke is to annul by ... recalling or taking back") (Scalia, J., dissenting) ... (cleaned up); United States v. Trotter , 321 ... F.Supp.3d 337, 346-47 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) ("The term ... 'revoke' appears to be somewhat of a misnomer ... Supervised release is not being 'revoked'; rather, a ... supervisee is being punished for violating conditions ... "); see also United States ... ...
-
United States v. Peguero
...ordinary meaning of revoke is to annul by recalling or taking back") (Scalia, J., dissenting) (cleaned up); United States v. Trotter , 321 F. Supp. 3d 337, 346-47 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) ("The term ‘revoke’ appears to be somewhat of a misnomer. ... Supervised release is not being ‘revoked’; rather,......
-
United States v. Ortiz
...his progress, he may be eligible for early termination of his supervised release under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). See United States v. Trotter, 321 F. Supp. 3d 337, 360 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) ("All courts, as far as this court is aware, agree with th[e] position that early termination power exists even ......
-
U.S.A. v. Sallis
... 1 U.S.A, v. Gregory Sallis Defendant No. 2:19-cr-00799-CASUnited States District Court, C.D. CaliforniaAugust 29, 2022 ... JENNA ... to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1). Dkt. 5 ... (“Request”). On May 27, 2022, the United State ... Probation and Pretrial Services filed a supervision report in ... opposition ... ability to later terminate it.”); United States v ... Trotter, 321 F.Supp.3d 337, 360 (E.D.N.Y. 2018) ... (“All courts, as far as this court is aware, ... ...