Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled its prior precedent in United States v. Truscello regarding the oral pronouncement of supervised release conditions. The court held that the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause requires sentencing courts to orally pronounce all non-mandatory conditions of supervised release in the defendant's presence during the sentencing proceeding. Consequently, the court vacated the imposition of thirteen discretionary conditions that were added to the written judgment without prior announcement and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether non‑mandatory (standard) conditions of supervised release must be pronounced in the defendant’s presence at sentencing.
- Whether a written‑judgment condition requiring the defendant to contribute to mental‑health service costs, which conflicts with the oral pronouncement, must be vacated.
- What is the appropriate standard of review for challenges to the terms of a sentence.
Holdings
- A sentencing court must orally pronounce any non‑mandatory (standard) conditions of supervised release in the defendant’s presence; if it fails to do so, the court may not later add those conditions to the written judgment.
- The condition requiring Maiorana to contribute to the cost of mental‑health services must be vacated because it contradicts the district court’s oral pronouncement.
Key quotations
“We therefore hold that to impose any non‑mandatory conditions of supervised release, including those labeled as “standard” in §5D1.3(c), a sentencing court must pronounce those conditions in the defendant’s presence during the sentencing proceeding and, without having done so, may not subsequently add them to the written judgment.” (at 1)
“Both the Constitution and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure grant a criminal defendant the right to be present during sentencing.” (at 2)
Factual background
Maiorana pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition. At sentencing the district court orally imposed seven special conditions and indicated that general conditions would be part of the judgment. The written judgment later added four mandatory, thirteen discretionary (standard) conditions, and a condition requiring the defendant to pay for mental‑health services, which conflicted with the oral pronouncement.
Procedural history
Maiorana was sentenced in the Eastern District of New York. The district court orally pronounced special conditions but later added twenty‑four conditions in the written judgment, including thirteen standard discretionary conditions and a mental‑health cost condition not pronounced at sentencing. Maiorana appealed.
Remand instructions
Vacate the thirteen discretionary (standard) conditions of supervised release and the mental‑health cost condition. If the district court wishes to reimpose any of the standard conditions, it must hold a hearing in the defendant’s presence and orally pronounce those conditions or adopt them by reference to a document provided to the defendant.