Opinion ID: 789371
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Ambiguity in the April 18, 2002 Order

Text: 25 The April 18, 2002 order rules on an application for a reduction of sentence pursuant to Rule 35(b). United States v. Spallone, 99-CR-0317, Order (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2002). In granting the motion, Judge Mishler ordered that Spallone be sentenced to time served. Id. (emphasis added). The highlighted word is ambiguous because it is subject to more than one plausible construction. See, e.g., Brass v. Am. Film Techs., Inc., 987 F.2d 142, 149 (2d Cir.1993) (noting that language is ambiguous if it is capable of more than one meaning when viewed objectively by a reasonably intelligent person) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). It could be interpreted, as defendant submits, to mean that Spallone's entire sentence as stated in his August 18, 2000 judgment of conviction had been reduced to time served, thereby absolving him of any responsibility to satisfy the supervised release and restitution provisions of that judgment. On the other hand, the word can also be interpreted, as the government urges, to mean that Spallone's incarceratory sentence had been reduced from thirty months to time served with no change to the supervised release term and restitution condition in the judgment of conviction. 26 A sentence is commonly understood to be the order by which a court or judge imposes punishment or penalty upon a person found guilty. Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2068 (1993); in short, the judgment of conviction, see Black's Law Dictionary 1367 (8th ed.1999) (defining sentence as [t]he judgment that a court formally pronounces after finding a criminal defendant guilty); Oxford English Dictionary 991 (2d ed. 1989) (The judicial determination of the punishment to be inflicted on a convicted criminal). Under federal law, however, the April 18, 2002 order is not a judgment of conviction. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(k) (requiring judgment of conviction to set forth the plea, the jury verdict or the court's findings, the adjudication, and the sentence). 7 27 The term sentence is also commonly understood to refer simply to the punishment or penalty imposed by the court. Webster's Third New International Dictionary 2068; accord Black's Law Dictionary 1367 (the punishment imposed on a criminal wrongdoer, for example, a sentence of 20 years in prison); Oxford English Dictionary 991 (the punishment to which a criminal is sentenced). So used, sentence sometimes refers to the totality of punishment imposed. See. e.g., United States v. Handakas, 329 F.3d 115, 116 (2d Cir.2003) (noting that the defendant's sentence included a term of imprisonment, a fine, an order of restitution, an order of forfeiture, and three years of supervised release); United States v. Sweeney, 90 F.3d 55, 56 (2d Cir.1996) (noting that sentence, as ultimately revised, included forty-eight months of incarceration, a fine, an order of restitution, and a three-year term of supervised release). On the other hand, with equal frequency, sentence is used to refer to each punishment within the judgment of conviction, most particularly to the term of incarceration. See, e.g., United States v. Johnson, 378 F.3d 230, 236 (2d Cir.2004) (noting that on a sentencing remand wherein restitution was ordered, the court imposed a sentence of 57 months' incarceration); United States v. Boyd, 222 F.3d 47, 48 (2d Cir.2000) ( per curiam ) (noting that challenge to sentence faulted court for calculating restitution on one basis while calculating prison sentence on another); United States v. Bove, 155 F.3d 44, 45 (2d Cir.1998) (noting that application of the Sentencing Guidelines produced a concurrent prison sentence of 12 months and 1 day on each count, a three-year term of supervised release, a $100 special assessment and a $15,000 fine); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(1) (using term sentence to refer only to prison sentence in requiring a statement of reasons for imposing a sentence at a particular point within a Guideline range that exceeds 24 months). 28 Precisely because the word sentence can plausibly support different meanings, it was necessary and appropriate for Judge Hurley to interpret the April 18, 2002 order to clarify whether the sentence of time served, as imposed, superseded all punishments imposed in Spallone's judgment of conviction or only his thirty-month prison term. 29