Document: 410 U.S. 605 93 S.Ct. 1151 35 L.Ed.2d 528 Charles B. BRADLEY, Jr., et al., Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 71—1304. Argued Jan. 8, 1973. Decided March 5, Syllabus On May 6, 1971, petitioners were convicted and sentenced for narcotics offenses committed in 1971. They received the minimum five-year sentences under a provision that was mandatory made not subject to suspension, probation, or parole. Effective 1, repealed liberalized by Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention Control Act of 1970. petitioners' motion vacation their remand resentencing, Court Appeals held new provisions unavailable view Act's saving clause, which them inapplicable 'prosecutions' antedating effective date. Held: 1. The word clause is be accorded its normal legal sense, sentencing part concept prosecution. therefore, barred District Judge from suspending sentence placing on probation. Pp. 607—610. 2. Under parole 18 U.S.C. § 4208(a) likewise petitioners, since terms penalty provided; and, any event, decision grant early must '(u)pon entering judgment conviction,' occurs before end 610—611. 455 F.2d 1181, affirmed. William P. Homans, Boston, Mass., petitioners. Philip A. Lacovara, Deputy Sol. Gen., Dept. Justice, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 In this case we decide whether may impose less than five years, suspend sentence, place offender specify he eligible parole, where federal offense but after Petitioners conspiring violate 26 4705(a) (1964 ed.) selling cocaine pursuance written order form, violation 7237(b) ed. Supp. V). conspiracy occurred At time, persons such violations years. could suspended, nor probation granted, pursuant 4202 unavailable. 7237(d) ed.). These §§ 1101(b)(3)(A) (b)(4)(A) 1970, 84 Stat. 1292. date days convicted. 2 Each petitioner term.1 appeal First Circuit, various points, here relevant, raised. Following affirmance convictions, moved vacated cases remanded resentencing Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 35. they contended should have considered 'certain alternatives, including suspension parole' became available as an 'appendage' appeal. It specific 1970 Act, 1103(a), read against background general provision, 109, required 'narcotics prior are punished according law force at time offense,' 'under mandate 109 statute, '(to) treated still remaining force." 1190, 1191. Accordingly, trial judge lacked power lesser sentence. 3 We granted petition writ certiorari, 407 908, 92 2438, 32 682 (1972), resolve conflict between Ninth Circuits, see United States v. Stephens, 449 103 (CA9 1971).2 4 * common law, repeal criminal statute abated all prosecutions had reached final disposition highest court authorized review them. See Bell Maryland, 378 226, 230, 1814, 1817, 12 822 (1964); Norris Crocker, 13 How. 429, 14 L.Ed. 210 (1852). Abatement included statute's re-enactment with different penalties. J. Sutherland, Statutes Statutory Construction 2031 n. (3d 1943). And rule applied even when reduced. See, e.g., King M'Kenzie, 168 Eng.Rep. 881 (Cr.Cas.1820); Beard State, 74 Md. 130, 21 700 (1891). To avoid results, legislatures frequently indicated intention abate pending repealing stating abated. generally Note, Today's Law Yesterday's Crime: Retroactive Application Ameliorative Criminal Legislation, 121 U.Pa.L.Rev. 120, 121—130 (1972). 5 Section 1103(a) clause. provides: 6 'Prosecutions occurring (the Act) shall affected repeals amendments (it) . reason thereof.' 7 contend given everyday meaning. When people speak prosecutions, usually mean proceeding way guilt determined. ordinary usage, prosecution, prosecution has concluded. providing '(p)rosecutions affected,' means only defendant found guilty creating does not, narrow interpretation 1103 prevent finding guilt. But nothing more, 8 Although argument some force, believe position consistent Congress' intent. Rather using '(t)he uses familiar expressions sense.' Henry States, 251 393, 395, 40 185, 186, 64 322 (1920). term 'prosecution' clearly imports beginning end. Cf. Kirby Illinois, 406 682, 1877, 411 (1972); Mempa Rhay, 389 128, 88 254, 19 336 (1967). 9 Berman 302 211, 58 164, 82 204 (1937), said, 'Final judgment. Miller Aderhold, 288 206, 210, 53 325, 77 702; Hill ex rel. Wample, 298 460, 464, 56 760, 762, 80 1283.' Id., 212, S.Ct., 166. terminates imposed. also Korematsu 319 432, 63 1124, 87 1497 (1943); Murray, 275 347, 48 146, 72 309 (1928); Affronti 350 79, 76 171, 100 62 (1955).3 So long been imposed, then, leave unaffected.4 10 therefore conclude properly rejected vacate resentencing. no consider Those decisions ordinarily terminates, preserves limitations time. II 11 Courts appeals dealt problem failed, however, fully special eligibility offenders Seventh Circuits hold parole.5 Circuit stated 'ineligible suspended sentences, probation.' F.2d, 1191 (emphasis added). system, two ways. Any prisoner 'whose record shows observed rules institution confined, released serving one-third of' his 4202. Alternatively, Judge, conviction (1) designate imprisonment imposed term, expiration become than, more maximum court, (2) fix served, event board determine.' 4208(a). makes latter provision. As years who violated Congress specifically provided apply 'for there penalty.' Pub.L. 85—752, 7, 847. make ended. thus cannot That question Appeals, it us. Petitioners' motion, ruled, requested so alternatives him did expand choices open case, correctly denied remand. availability 4202, rather matter,6 express opinion. 15 Affirmed. 16 BRENNAN WHITE join Part I Court's would affirm reasons expressed. s forecloses both 4208(a), if debatable mandates conclusion section. do 17 DOUGLAS, dissenting. correct used was, my view, one 103, 105: 'Prosecution ends purpose section served old entered abatement proceedings avoided. point litigation ended available. (1943). What thereafter—the manner carried out, executed satisfied, suspended—in affects case.' 20 ambiguities statutory language peculiar legislation dealing matters. how those resolved often rationalized. most dramatic illustration, least modern times, illustrated Rosenberg 346 273, 73 1152, 97 1607, divided ambiguity scheme life, favor. instant proportion, entail resolution unspoken assumptions—those favoring status quo prison systems opposed real rehabilitation cure present crises. Holmes 'judges legislate, can interstitutially; confined molar molecular motions.' Southern Pacific Co. Jensen, 244 205, 221, ,37 524, 531, 61 1086 (dissenting opinion).* Judges legislative policies. construing ambiguous Code, try give meaning help reverse trend Nation 'person' constitutional sense. Fay Stender, writing introduction Maximum Security, p. X, described 'tremendously sophisticated defenses increase enforceable human rights prisoner.' (E. Pell ed., Bantam Books 1973.) 22 A strict rigid minor start other direction. take. Bradley, Helliesen, Odell unlawfully carrying firearm during commission felony, 924(c)(2). year prison; each placed three these counts. McGarr, 461 (CA7 1972); Fiotto, 454 252 (CA2 1972). involve determining function concluded alter previously include precise issues are, course, issue case. show here. argue imposition precedes actions imposing then ordering close unrealistic intended fragment what essentially single proceeding. 2, supra. informed oral 'the Board Parole now considering defendants offenses.' Tr. Oral Arg. 23. Our bearing infra, 611. lies Parole, terminated. Whether limits said: '(I)n substance growth legislative. deeper sense courts declare always fact new. grounds. very considerations rarely mention, apology, secret root draws juices life. mean, expedient community concerned. Every important principle developed bottom result definitely understood views public policy; generally, sure, our practice traditions, unconscious instinctive preferences inarticulate none traceable policy last analysis. administered able experienced men, know too much sacrifice good syllogism, will ancient maintain themselves way, fitted them, gradually receive content form grounds transplanted. importance tracing process Fact unconscious, involves attempt follow precedents, well hence, shown half effort liberty freedom possible before.' Common Carriers Law, Am.L.Rev. 609, 630—631 (1879).

Category: 0