United States v. Mears<\/em> agreed that the district court erred in imposing the special conditions on his federal supervised release. The defendant had no history of drug or alcohol abuse, and drugs or alcohol were not linked to any of the offenses for which he was convicted. The Second Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and ruled that it was plain error for the district court to impose those conditions of the defendant’s federal supervised release. The case was remanded to the district court for the purpose of removing those conditions.<\/p>\nThe Reasonableness of Federal Supervised Release Conditions<\/h2>\n Even though some special conditions of federal supervised release may seem like decent rules for someone to live their life by, this does not necessarily mean that the court can require them in every circumstance. One way that a court could impose a condition that seems overbearing or almost paternal in nature is that the judge may consider the specific condition of the defendant. For example, if a defendant has a history of drug or alcohol use, a condition of federal supervised release that barred the defendant from consuming alcohol would be reasonably related. This is especially true if it was shown that the defendant\u2019s drug or alcohol use contributed to his criminal activities.<\/p>\n
However, the Second Circuit’s ruling in United States v. Mears<\/em> serves as a timely reminder that a district court may not get carried away in imposing conditions on federal supervised release that do not relate to the crime.<\/p>\nAppealing Conditions of Federal Supervised Release<\/h2>\n Although the Second Circuit undertook a review of the district court’s sentence in United States v. Mears<\/em> based on plain error analysis, a defendant is entitled to appeal conditions of his federal supervised release under other circumstances. One of the reasons why a defendant must take the conditions of his federal supervised release sentence seriously is that the defendant could end up back in prison if he is found to be violating the conditions of release. Thus, if a defendant’s federal supervised release includes a condition that the defendant would almost certainly violate, it is worth exploring all possible appeal options for that condition.<\/p>\nIf you or a loved one believe that a condition of federal supervised release has been imposed that is not fitting with the crime committed or the known behaviors of the defendant, then you should consult with an experienced federal criminal defense attorney<\/a>, such as Brandon Sample, Esq., to explore what options you may have to mount a worthwhile appeal.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"What happens when a federal district court imposes a seemingly draconian or arbitrary condition on a defendant’s federal supervised release? Is this condition allowed to stand? The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently addressed this issue in United States v. Mears and provided a necessary refresher on the requirement that any federal supervised release conditions…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":87142,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[325],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Federal Supervised Release Conditions Reexamined | 802-444-4357<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n