Ginsburg sides with conservative justices in ruling over prison sentence

The Supreme Court on Monday found that a criminal defendant can be sentenced for violating his supervised release, even if the release expires while he is incarcerated ahead of facing new charges.

The justices, divided in the 5-4 decision, ruled against Jason Mont's argument that a district court shouldn't be able to charge him for violating his release because the term had expired at the time of the new sentencing.

ADVERTISEMENT

Justice Ruth Bader GinsburgRuth Bader GinsburgOn The Trail: Why 2020 is the most important election in our lifetime Supreme Court sharply divided over state aid for religious schools Equal Rights Amendment will replace equality with enforced sameness MORE sided with conservative Justices Clarence ThomasClarence ThomasOn The Trail: Why 2020 is the most important election in our lifetime Anita Hill to Iowa crowd: 'Statute of limitations' for Biden apology is 'up' Sanders campaign official: Biden 'actively courted pro-segregation senators' to block black students from white schools MORE, John Roberts, Samuel AlitoSamuel AlitoFormer senior Senate GOP aide says Republicans should call witnesses On The Trail: Why 2020 is the most important election in our lifetime Supreme Court sharply divided over state aid for religious schools MORE and Brett KavanaughBrett Michael KavanaughDemocrats Manchin, Jones signal they're undecided on Trump removal vote Collins walks impeachment tightrope Supreme Court sharply divided over state aid for religious schools MORE in the majority. Justice Neil GorsuchNeil GorsuchJanuary reminds us why courts matter — and the dangers of 'Trump judges' Planned Parenthood launches M campaign to back Democrats in 2020 Appeals court appears wary of letting Trump reinstate death sentences MORE joined liberal Justices Sonia SotomayorSonia SotomayorSupreme Court sharply divided over state aid for religious schools Justice Roberts neglects his own role in tilting American democracy Turley: Testifying for Republicans should not be a sin for academics MORE, Stephen BreyerStephen BreyerOn The Trail: Why 2020 is the most important election in our lifetime Justices grapple with 'Bridgegate' convictions The Trumpification of the federal courts MORE and Elena KaganElena KaganSupreme Court sharply divided over state aid for religious schools Buttigieg, Klobuchar lay out criteria for potential judicial nominees Welcome to third-world democracy and impeachment MORE in opposing the decision.

Mont had previously been convicted on felony drug and gun charges and served 84 months in prison before beginning a five-year supervised release due to end in March 2017.

However, he faced other charges in 2015 and 2016 and was incarcerated in state jail in June 2016. After several delays of a hearing, a district court heard and ruled that Mont had violated his supervised release and imposed another prison sentence.

Mont had opposed the new 42-month sentence, set to run after completing the sentence for his new charges, which he pleaded guilty to. He said that he shouldn't face the new sentence because the court had repeatedly delayed the hearing until after the end date for his supervised release term.

Thomas wrote in the majority opinion that "time in pretrial detention constitutes supervised release only if the charges against the defendant are dismissed or the defendant is acquitted."

"This ensures that the defendant is not faulted for conduct he might not have committed, while otherwise giving full effect to the lawful judgment previously imposed on the defendant."

However, Sotomayor wrote in the dissenting opinion that she doesn't agree with the majority's reasoning "that a person 'is imprisoned in connection with a conviction' before any conviction has occurred."