Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 783.0

529US3

Unit: $U56

[09-28-01 09:22:19] PAGES PGT: OPIN

708

JOHNSON v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

equivocally supported the dissent, by writing subsection (3)
to provide that the judge could “revoke” or “terminate” the
term of supervised release and sentence the defendant to a
further term of incarceration. There is no reason to think
that under that regime the court would lack the power to
impose a subsequent term of supervised release in accord-
ance with its general sentencing authority under 18 U. S. C.
§ 3583(a). This section provides that “[t]he court, in impos-
ing a sentence to a term of imprisonment for a felony or
a misdemeanor, may include as a part of the sentence a
requirement that the defendant be placed on a term of su-
pervised release after imprisonment . . . .” Thus, on the
dissent’s reading, when Johnson’s supervised release was
revoked and he was committed to prison, the District Court
“impos[ed] a sentence to a term of imprisonment.” See,
e. g., App. 36, 39. And that sentence was, as already noted,
imposed for his initial offense, the Class D felony violation of
§ 1029(b)(2). See supra, at 699–701. Nor would it be mere
formalism to link the second prison sentence to the initial
offense; the gravity of the initial offense determines the max-
imum term of reimprisonment, see § 3583(e)(3), just as it con-
trols the maximum term of supervised release in the initial
sentencing, see § 3583(b). Since on the dissent’s understand-
ing the resentencing proceeding would fall literally and sen-
sibly within the terms of § 3583(a), a plain meaning approach
would ﬁnd authority for reimposition of supervised release
there. Cf. United States v. Wesley, 81 F. 3d 482, 483–484
(CA4 1996) (ﬁnding that § 3583(a) grants power to impose a
term of supervised release following reimprisonment at re-
sentencing for violation of probation).

There is, then, nothing surprising about the consequences
of our reading. The reading also enjoys the virtue of serv-
ing the evident congressional purpose. The congressional
policy in providing for a term of supervised release after
incarceration is to improve the odds of a successful transition