Document: 434 U.S. 542 98 S.Ct. 849 55 L.Ed.2d 14 Rickey Lee DURST et al., Petitioners,v.UNITED STATES. No. 76-5935. Argued Dec. 5, 1977. Decided Feb. 22, 1978. Syllabus Petitioners, youth offenders, pleaded guilty to various federal offenses and, under § 5010(a) of the Federal Youth Corrections Act (YCA), were given suspended sentences and placed on probation, which was conditioned payment fines in one instance making restitution. Their convictions affirmed courts below. While now conceding that restitution is a permissible condition probation YCA, petitioners contend sentence substitute for any other penalty provision, since does not expressly authorize fines, authority impose them cannot be imputed from provision. They argue, moreover, fine necessarily punitive contrary rehabilitative goals YCA. Held : When offender 5010(a), may required, when otherwise applicable provision permits, imposed as conditions probation. Pp. 549-554. (a) Though language neither grants nor withholds or order restitution, 5023(a) YCA incorporates by reference conferred general statute, 18 U.S.C. 3651 (1976 ed.), permit such an exaction, it clear YCA's legislative history Congress' purpose adopting assure would displace 549-553. (b) In preserving Congress concluded comports with goals. 553-554. 4 Cir., 549 F.2d 799, affirmed. Michael S. Frisch, petitioners, pro hac vice, special leave Court. Sol. Gen. Wade H. McCree, Jr., Detroit, Mich., respondent. Mr. Justice BRENNAN delivered opinion 1 We granted certiorari, 430 929, 97 1547, 51 772 (1977), decide whether trial judge (or designated United States Magistrate) who suspends commitment places pursuant 5005 seq. fine, require both, probation.1 2 Each five separate proceeding before Magistrate offense penalties imprisonment both are provided. Petitioners Durst Rice obstruction mails violation 1701 ed.). Blystone Pinnick stealing property value less than $100 Government reservation 661 Petitioner Flakes theft belonging 641 petitioner sentenced Magistrate, imprisonment.2 ordered pay $50 each others $100. also make amount $160, 3 appealed his District Court Maryland, consolidated appeals. Crim.Action N-75-0828 (June 25, 1976). The Appeals Fourth Circuit unpublished per curiam opinion, 76-1905 (Dec. 9, 1976), judgt. reported at relying its earlier decision v. Oliver, 546 1096 (1976), cert. pending 76-5632, had held imposition consistent addition, instant case stated: "For reasons expressed we believe requirement consistent." App. 2. agree that, placing sentencing therefore affirm judgment Appeals. * primarily outgrowth recommendations Judicial Conference States, see Dorszynski 418 424, 432, 94 3042, 3048, 41 855 (1974), designed reduce criminality among youth. found between ages 16 "special factors operated produce habitual criminals. [Moreover,] then-existing methods treating criminally inclined youths inadequate avoiding recidivism." Id., 432-433, S.Ct., 3048 (citation omitted). 5 core concept like England's Borstal System upon modeled,3 treatment should substituted retribution goal.4 Both incorporate three features thought essential operation successful program: flexibility choosing variety settings programs tailored individual needs;5 separation offenders hardened criminals;6 careful flexible control duration supervised release.7 established framework creation program incorporating these features, alternative existing ptions, authorized Attorney General Act. Dorszynski, supra, 437-440, 3049-3051. 6 contains four provisions regarding sentencing. Section provides "[i]f court need commitment," execution might Sections 5010(b) (c) provide if committed, "in lieu provided law," custody supervision. 5010(d) shall find will derive benefit subsection (c)," "under provision."8 7 A particularly valuable prospect obtaining certificate setting aside conviction. automatically issues committed 5010(c) unconditionally released prior expiration maximum imposed. 5021(a) 1961, amended extend probat discharges Oct. 3, Pub.L. 87-336, 75 Stat. 750 (codified 5021(b) ed.)). 8 two arguments support their submission judges option suspending probation.9 First, they argue alternatives statute convicted; explicitly have no Second, inconsistent Neither has merit. II 9 orders Another however, 5023(a), exactions. provides: "Nothing [the Act] limit affect power suspend place construed wise amend, repeal, chapter 231 [§§ 3651-3656] this title . relative probation." Chapter ed.) provides, inter alia: 10 "While thereof, defendant— 11 "May required several sums; 12 reparation aggrieved parties actual damages loss caused conviction ."10 13 contained 5010 distinct Recognizing makes sentence, concede11 probationary because directly authorizes without resort On hand, only convicted so provides.12 Thus, conjunction requires Petitioners' refuted clearly reveals intended thereby preserve powers 5010(a). House Report accompanying S.2609, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. (1949), bill enacted stating: 15 "Under bill's] provisions, finds treatment, grant left undisturbed bill." (Emphasis added.) H.R.Rep.No.2979, 2d Sess., (1950); U.S.Code Cong. Service 1950, p. 3985. same view during hearings H.R.2140, 78th (1943), whose corrections nearly identical those S.2609 introduced 1949. Judge Phillips, Chairman Subcommittee responsible drafting model correction legislation sponsored Conference, emphasized "[i]t leaves system] absolutely undisturbed,"13 intent sponsoring retain options respect adult punishment, while simply adding new treatment. See 1943 Hearings 34-37. 17 §§ buttresses understanding 5023(a). Those subsections law." words "of imprisonment" did appear original recommended 1943. tit. III, 1(a), reprinted 3. Addition letter Biddle Subcommittee. That letter, which, according members concurred read into record hearings, explained reason follows: "Sentence Authority law but fine. It should, possible Authority, where imposed." Letter Francis E. Walter 7, 1943), 110-111. 19 introduced, law, Biddle. This demonstrates added pre-existing imprisonment. fact contemplated militates favor construction (a). There directed treated differently respect.14 20 conclude 21 With petitioners' second argument, YCA,15 sufficient answer Moreover, persuaded regarded much force observation Court: 22 "[A] could By employing [a probation], youthful receive harsh incarceration, assuring accepts responsibility transgression. net result increased would, many cases, stimulate young person mature good law-abiding citizen." 36-37. 23 Affirmed. 24 BLACKMUN took part consideration case. Courts reached conflicting conclusions concerning sentence. Ninth Circuit, Bowens, 514 440 (1975); Mollet, 510 625, (9 1975), disagreement case, improper. Hayes, 474 965 (1973), Fifth Cramer Wise, 501 959 addressed question, Hix, 545 1247 Third Buechler, 557 1002 properly Rice, adult, 4216 permits appropriate cases. S.Rep.No.1180, (1949); Prevention Crime 1908, Edw. ch. 59, pt. 1; Criminal 1948, & Geo. 6, 58; Eliz. 2, 39. For discussion similarities Note, Act: Past Concern Need Legislative Reappraisal, Am.Crim.L.Rev. 229, 233-242 (1972). "The underlying theory retributive punishment training correct prevent antisocial tendencies. departs mere idea dealing criminals looks objective rehabilitation." "shall undergo institutions security, medium minimum security types, including schools, hospitals, farms, forestry camps, agencies treatment." 5011 examination, classification, periodic re-evaluation basis tailor Act's needs. 5014-5017 emphasis individualized emulated. described 5; 3983, "[The System] embraces institutions. Some walled. Others completely open. institution own particular specialty. "One complete facilities trade metal woodwork. laid out run summer camp work recreational keep boys doors. third largely devoted agriculture stock raising. One graduates skilled workers building trades. differ respects, certain things common. "Second, plan based close acquaintance needs antecedents calculated return men society social rehabilitated citizens. "Three cardinal principles dominate system: (1) flexibility, (2) individualization, (3) intangibles." 3987. "By herding maturity, novice sophisticate, impressionable hardened, subjecting evil influences older teaching criminal techniques, inhibitions come normal contacts counteracting prophylaxis, our penal actively spread infection crime foster, rather check, it." 2-3; statement Bennett, Director Bureau Prisons, Senate indeterminate discretion vested Division release time. Bennett said: "From hundreds cases type across my desk I formed conclusion task correcting crucial element Attitudes, habits, interests, standards changed overnight. Training habits skills Once received institutional program, just important community effected promptly. confined there comes period he best prospe ts community. His occur If ready establishing himself; later, become bitter, unsure himself, jittery athlete overtrained. "Rarely day go younger being either far too long short, carry correctional Correctional Offenders: S.1114 Committee Judiciary, 27 (1949). sought providing 5017 periods responsive progress. full: "(a) commitment, "(b) offender, punishable subsection, may, supervision until discharged Commission section 5017(c) chapter; "(c) able six years date further stands 5017(d) chapter. "(d) (c), then "(e) desires additional information study classification center agency. Within sixty days order, grant, report findings." abandoned contention petition certiorari n. 11, infra. relevant part: "Upon entering death life imprisonment, having jurisdiction try against satisfied ends justice interest public well defendant served thereby, terms deems best. ." apparently inherently essentially rehabilitative. Brief 11. brief, argued real concern use vehicle accomplish permitted statute. Further, exclusive beyond limits improper." Ibid. During oral 3651. Tr. Oral Arg. 8, 9. conceded "only calls and/or imprisonment." 12. address question suggested phrasing, Compare id., Walter, quoted, infra, 552. full Phillips' remark bill's effect system "Mr. Cravens. Does way so-called system? "Judge Phillips. Not all. attempt disturb that? No sir; working ought disturbed. And drafted mind? Yes, sir. undisturbed." Improvement Parole: H.R.2139 H.R.2140 37 (1943) (hereinafter Hearings). (b), yet withhold "qualitative" distinction people subsections. 8. argument perceived "classes" Act, conflicts individualization supra. premise merit do not, basic accord punishment. 4, ibid., text.

Category: 1