[20190627]LSB10221_哪种惩罚适合哪种罪行最高法院将考虑监管释放法规的一部分是否违宪.pdf

CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Legal SidebarLegal Sidebari i Which Punishment Fits Which Crime?: Supreme Court to Consider Whether Portion of Supervised Release Statute is Unconstitutional Updated June 27, 2019 UPDATE: On June 26, 2019, the Supreme Court issued its decision in United States v. Haymond, with five Justices agreeing that applying 18 U.S.C. 3583(k) with respect to the defendants conduct was unconstitutional. Justice Gorsuch, writing for a plurality of four Justices, observed that Section 3583(k) permitted the judge in the defendants case, rather than the jury, to find facts that resulted in the defendant “facing a minimum of five years in prison instead of as little as none.” For the plurality, this judicial fact-finding “increased the legally prescribed range of allowable sentences in violation of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments.” The plurality limited its opinion to Section 3583(k)s “unusual” mandatory-minimum sentencing provision for certain violations of supervised release conditions as it applied in the case before the Court, opting not to pass judgment on ordinary supervised release revocation proceedings that typically involve j