Document: 473 U.S. 716 105 S.Ct. 3401 87 L.Ed.2d 516 Philip S. CARCHMAN, Mercer County Prosecutor, Petitioner,v.Richard NASH. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Petitioner, v. Richard Nos. 84-776, 84-835. Argued April 22, 1985. Decided July 2, Syllabus Article III of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (Agreement), a congressionally sanctioned interstate compact, establishes procedure by which prisoner incarcerated in one State (the sending State) may demand speedy disposition "any untried indictment, information or complaint" that is basis detainer lodged against him another receiving State). If makes such demand, Art. requires authorities to bring trial within 180 days court must dismiss information, complaint, and will cease be any force effect. Respondent was convicted criminal charges New Jersey Superior Court, imposed prison sentences 2-year term probation follow imprisonment. Thereafter, while probation, respondent charged with offenses Pennsylvania sentenced there. While he awaiting Pennsylvania, notified Court had violated his committing issued an arrest warrant, as corrections officials Pennsylvania. Although requested make final probation-violation charge, failed days. then brought habeas corpus petition Federal District seeking dismissal charge Jersey's noncompliance III. The stayed respondent's federal action pending exhaustion state-court remedies. After courts denied relief under Agreement, revoked resentenced imprisonment, granted for writ corpus. Appeals affirmed, holding outstanding "untried meaning Held: does not apply detainers based charges. Pp. 724-734. (a) language indicates applies solely its terms "indictment," "information," "complaint." most natural interpretation these they refer documents charging individual having committed offense. This reinforced adjective "untried," requirement promptly "brought trial," limitation obtains custody "only purpose permitting prosecution" A accuse offense sense initiating prosecution. might commission offense, it result probationer's being "prosecuted" trial" Nor initially since already have been tried Accordingly, probation-revocation come plain Agreement. 724-726. (b) legislative history created Council Governments, drafter directly address issue this case support inference intended And congressional Congress, adopted considered only 726-729. (c) purposes including enabling prisoners obtain prompt underlying order protect them from adverse consequences their treatment rehabilitation, do compel conclusion that, contrary Agreement's language, detainers. Such are significantly less advanced application than criminal-charge 729-734. 739 F.2d 878 (CA3 1984), reversed. Carchman, Princeton, N.J., petitioners both cases. John Burke, III, East Orange, cases, pro hac vice, special leave Court. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion 1 gives right State. These cases present whether 2 * (Agreement) compact among 48 States, Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, United States. drafted 1956 Governments 1958 Jersey, where now codified N.J.Stat.Ann. § 2A:159A-1 et seq. (West 1971). Compact Clause, U.S.Const., I, 10, cl. 3, thus law subject construction. Cuyler Adams, 449 433, 438-442, 101 703, 706-708, 66 641 (1981). 3 request filed justice agency institution incarcerated, asking either hold notify when release imminent. See id., at 436, n. S.Ct., 706, (citing quoting H.R.Rep. No. 91-1018, p. (1970), S.Rep. 91-1356, (1970)), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News 1970, 4864; States Mauro, 436 340, 359, 98 1834, 1846, 56 329 (1978); Moody Daggett, 429 78, 80-81, 97 274, 275, 50 236 (1976); Suggested Legislation, Program 1957, 74 (1956). generally charges, parole additional prisoner. Dauber, Reforming Detainer System: Case Study, 7 Crim.L.Bull. 669, 676 (1971). L. Abramson, Criminal (1979). 4 finding "charges prisoner, indictments, informations complaints, difficulties securing persons other jurisdictions, produce uncertainties obstruct programs rehabilitation." I. As has explained: 5 "The inmate who filled anxiety apprehension frequently respond training program. He often kept close custody, bars trustyships, moderations opportunity transfer farms work camps. In many jurisdictions eligible parole; there little hope after optimum period treatment, ready return society excellent possibility offend again. Instead, becomes embittered continued institutionalization objective correctional system defeated." 6 also U.S., 449, 712; 353, 356, 359-360, 1843, 1845, 1846-1847. "to encourage expeditious orderly [outstanding] determination proper status all complaints." To achieve purpose, party complaint prisoner"1 Specifically, warden inform upon based. request, forward it, together certificate providing certain about prisoner's confinement, appropriate prosecuting official days, absent good cause shown, prejudice, II 8 On June 21, 1976, Nash, Law Division, County, pleaded guilty breaking entering intent rape, assault rape. October 29, 18 months each count, run consecutively. suspended two years 13, 1978, arrested Montgomery Pa., burglary, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, loitering. March 14, 1979, 13 year. 9 Probation Department, At Department's bench warrant arrest. 10 Beginning sent series letters requesting charge. invoked. 11 6, 1980, Middle State's transferred, pursuant 28 U.S.C. 1406(a), Jersey. App. Pet. Cert. 101. That state Id., 81. 12 petitioned motion ruled convictions constituted violation, ordered serve consecutive 18-month convictions, credit 249 served 1976 1977. Appellate Division affirmed court's judgment, 44, Supreme certification. 43. returned 1983, corpus, vacated revocation, custody.2 558 F.Supp. (1983). Petitioner prosecutor, took appeal Third Circuit. Department Corrections, point sought intervene because Court's decision invalidated policy parole- fall Its Appeals. 18. 14 Agreement.3 Nash Jeffes, (1984). reaching decision, "decline[d] adopt technical relevant III," 883, instead relied "the broader legislation." 882. reasoned principal enable would furthered applying completed "policy analysis," 9, concluding benefit outweigh administrative burdens, paperwork cost transporting provide hearings. 15 view conflict, see supra, we certiorari. 469 1157, 902, 83 917 (1985). A. 16 We begin considering complaint." words "complaint" Fed.Rules Crim.Proc. (complaint) (indictment information). seem matters can full trial, III's requests "shall days." (Emphasis added.) 17 V should interpreted V(a) provides: "In response made IV hereof, authority shall offer deliver temporary person efficient prosecution had." V(c) provides "in event provided jurisdiction enter dismissing same thereon effect." Finally, V(d) referred agreement contained more complaints form arising out transaction." therefore clear phrase refers prosecution, Indeed, context probationer serving sentence 19 Nor, course, results hearing, proceeding determine conditions modified resentenced, entitled panoply due process rights accorded defendant trial. Gagnon Scarpelli, 411 778, 93 1756, 36 656 (1973). Cf. Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 92 2593, 33 484 (1972) (parole-revocation hearing). 20 contends just relying principally find According respondent, drafters apply, literally, prisoner," However, appears declaration read operative Arts. discussed above, meant "charges" charges.4 21 conclude complaint," B 22 persuade us depart what relies following passage comments Agreement: 23 "A defined insuring available placed detainer. Wardens institutions men invariably recognize warrants placing impending various varying conditions, example, escaped parolee commits new crime imprisoned state; man previously crimes different jurisdictions." (emphasis added). 24 introductory paragraph Council's discussion suggested legislation. It general definition brief description how arise. italicized suggests some arise parole-violation fact dispute here. By terms, however, detainers, but those complaint."5 above illuminate, purport scope phrase. 25 if were define lead difficult reconcile procedures established particular, invokes "caus[ing] officer officer's written notice place imprisonment notification mechanism efficacious prosecutors judges involved parole-revocation proceedings. likely devised mechanism. Furthermore, III(d) original without [indictment, complaint] prejudice." Similarly, understand provisions adjudicated board similar agency, "pending" court. 26 reference parolees drafting include 27 contrast precise case, Pub.L. 91-538, 84 Stat. 1397, noted House Senate Reports explain: sentence, advising wanted face jurisdiction." (1970); (1970) added), 4865. Congressional contain references "convicted charges." 2; addition, Senator Hruska stated debates "At heart measure proposition determined fashion." 116 Cong.Rec. 38840 C noted, said "a F.2d, nor statements addressing specific rather legislation," 29 Adoption motivated part practice filing basis.6 withdrawn shortly before released.7 Even though unsubstantiated, detrimental effect treatment.8 enables require lodging drop resulting way, record unsubstantiated 30 detainer, generally, resulted conviction incarceration State.9 Because conclusively establish 490, 2604 (parole revocation hearing), unsubstantiated. Thus, abuses adoption occur 31 seeks charges,"10 well "determination complaints," eliminate "uncertainties associated severe 680 (1971) (parole- involve uncertainty detainers). factual guilt violation leading Disposition 89, 279, (1976) violation); 64-65, 81 ultimate consequence merely replaced reimposed effects rehabilitation. 678-679. Since serious enough State, no doubt often, sentence. likelihood length Moreover, relitigate 2604, "most serious," Barker Wingo, 407 514, 532, 2182, 2193, (1972), interests accused obtaining charges—the interest " 'limit[ing] possibilities long delay impair [his] ability . defend himself,' Smith Hooey, 393 374, 378, 89 574, 577, 607 (1969), quotingUnited Ewell, 383 116, 120, 86 773, 776, 627 (1966)—is unlikely strongly implicated context. 32 desirable expedite explained (1976), violations: "[I]n this, admits plainly constituting remaining inquiry justified notwithstanding violation. uniquely 'prediction live antisocial acts.' Morrissey, supra [408 U.S.], 480 [92 2599]. making prophecy, parolee's institutional perhaps significant factors. Forcing immediately deprive vital salient factor recent revoke foreordained. Given predictive nature hearing held time prediction accurate—at expiration intervening sentence." 89., 279-280. 34 Of lies circumstances legitimate For believe mitigating evidence probation. Alternatively, imposition concurrent simply prefer certainty known relative 35 Nevertheless, Whether sufficiently costs, and, means disposing detainers,11 questions judgment parties history, cannot alone so ordered. 37 BRENNAN, whom MARSHALL STEVENS join, dissenting. 38 Must disposed requested? permits invoke "request lodged." 2A:159A-3 1971) (hereinafter cited only). No interpretive rule I am aware "complaints" subsume intention exclude comprehensive solution problem itself acknowledges "advanced" strictures. Ante, 733-734. IX directs "[t]his liberally construed effectuate purposes," author ago, still agrees.1 mention IX, holds respectfully suggest holding, constructs artificial "plain language" argument assumes conclusion, vitiates measure, reverses rationale our major precedent construing (1978). dissent. 39 Prior probationary term, Upon learning department Nash's probable violation,2 Bench Warrant DETAINER." Supp. Record 3. document 40 officials, courts, treated receipt, dispose contacted attempted comply requirements. reviewed involving failure limits required 641, 651 41 reasons adoption" implicated, "no reason give unduly restrictive meaning" terms. 361-362, 1848; accord, 443, 448-450, 711-712, (1981) (looking light IX's "liberal construction" rule). necessary review relate 42 Three distinct goals generated enactment (1) definitive resolution potential administrators know released, (2) ensure frivolous linger, (3) reciprocal ease signatory wrongdoing, thereby superseding cumbersome extradition procedures. Cuyler, 446-450, 710-712; 359-364, 1846-1849; pp. 74-79 (1956) CSG Report). Noting part" second purpose—speedy possibly places far too much emphasis obviously least stemming conduct.3 43 unarguable motivating behind first listed above: unresolved determinate length, in-prison programming rehabilitation could freely occur.4 educational, vocational, overcrowded designed inmates released public world, prisons put end line programs. facing longer believed greater escape risks, stricter levels benefits (such recreational work-release trusty status). even otherwise receive, theory "paroled into" prison.5 Thus outstanding" create "uncertainties" "obstruct I.6 statement represents findings Congress. is, therefore, bodies, "prefer charge." 734. 44 near strict streets education, job training, received. undisputed fact, palpably punitive life rehabilitative future release.7 45 Prosecutors operate deny substantial programs, eventual release. acknowledges, "little basis" 'exact punishment' impermissibly, "withdrawn before" damage done. 729-730, 6.8 evident lawlessness practices disruptive ibid., order, large part, regarding dates. Handbook Crime Control (1978 ed.) permit secure degree knowledge own possible better plans treatment"). 46 Obviously, implicates concerns extent Accord, N. Cohen J. Gobert, Parole 12.02, 566 (1983) ("[T]he policies [the Agreement] equally violator warrant"). Both types incarceration, yet time. Just normally permitted impose broad discretion resentencing violations subsequent imprisonment.9 "factual guilt" ante, 732, irrelevant term. reason, "fully implicated," 362, 1848, very problems concerned," present. 47 analysis Mauro instructive. concluded "written custody" accommodate ad prosequendum Government (as dissent noted) command ignore. 361-364, 1847-1849; 366, 1850 (REHNQUIST, J., dissenting). rejected sort semantic formalism practiced today, virtually echoes dissent.10 "narrow reading" "request" inappropriate nothing "[a]ny reading section allow gain advantages assuming responsibilities action." 364, 1849 (footnotes omitted). Mauro's thrown winds whenever comes up plausible application—obviously judicially rewritten But, 449-450, 712, consideration "purpose, structure, history" counsels miserly undeniably here.11 precedents mind turns 49 Literally applied, 726, 734, restrictions operation admits. states days," "[i]f prior dismissing" neither common plea diverted into pretrial plan "trial."12 "trial" used represent concept "final disposition" indeed, uses interchangeably. 733 (noting "speedy charges") "indictment, strictly construed, encompass varied initiate process. Virginia, whereby grand jury involvement prosecutor. Va.Code 19.2-216 called "presentment" admitted oral argument, Tr. Oral Arg. 10; Brief University Virginia School Post-Conviction Assistance Project Amicus Curiae 13-14. Yet presentments are, indictments informations. properly rejects "interpret[ing]" "documents offense." 724. 51 Once recognizes, albeit silently, propriety efforts, reliance persuade. deal comprehensively caused kinds, type precludes conclusion. usage, as, inter alia, "utterance expressing grievance." Webster's International Unabridged Dictionary 546 (2d ed. 1957). restricted legal been, 1949 Rules amended, sweeping generic applicable civil proceedings encompassing "every action" court, "technical forms pleading." Civ.Proc. 1, 8(e)(1); Fed.Rule Nothing particular usage looks Procedure Neither statutory construction I; think whole coextensive conflicting. But cf. 4. Ultimately, flat majority determines 52 loses battle seriously troubled blind eye consequent vitiation itself. acts constitute between one-half two-thirds Nation's prisons.13 uniform statute surely surprised disappointed learn efforts succeeded dealing addressed.14 53 "deal comprehensively" kinds;15 significantly, absolutely affirmative indication contains "legislative purpose," reach person," detainers." concedes sidesteps declaring "does 'any complaint.' 727 phrase, did intend suggests, reading.16 54 finally founded "statement aims guiding principles" drawn 1948. Report 74-75.17 Those principles discuss "detainers" basis, declared "should govern actions authorities, sentencing judges, hamper administration correction effective criminals." 75 Not suspicion third survive unaffected "hamper" Principle explicitly attention nonprosecuting charges: "Prison take settle them." Ibid. 55 reprinting "govern[ing]" principles, went introduce three proposals "dea[l] detainers," 76, "interstate field." 78. offered proposal "by jurisdiction," again qualification: clearing possible." my mind, impossible effort imagine authors unqualified repeatedly referring "parole" experts, somehow less-than-comprehensive answer "problems Rather attempt effort, ignores historical purpose. Presenting single "general definition," 726-727, quickly retreats conclusion-assuming argument. explain rational draft partial ever affirmatively stating.18 57 recently remedial statutes "take straitjackets enactment." Dowling 207, 228, 3127, ----, 152 especially true compacts entered Acts amenable amendment.19 Much changed 1957 corrections; in-person reimposed, (1973); Black Romano, 471 606, 612, 2254, 85 636 (1985), ethic has, worse, largely abandoned.20 timely expense transportation jurisdiction,21 thought accrue discounted. argues important written—disposition programming—is fully invoked arguments dissatisfaction chosen illegitimate, nonjudicial bases decision. 58 rests although linked "significantly less" Ignoring bulk described defers claims "administrative costs" paternalistic "desirab[ility of] delay"22 prisoners. 733-734.23 turned head. determining achieved fair decides narrow reading, advancement insufficient directives. backwards reasoning Consequently, exercised construe law, once able file "gain intended." 59 III(a) pertinent part: "Whenever penal during continuance complaint: shown open counsel present, matter grant reasonable continuance." sufficient ruling. assume, deciding, ruling complied correct. conflicts rulings Ninth Circuit four last resort. Roach, 745 1252 (CA9 1984); Padilla 279 Ark. 100, 648 S.W.2d 797 (1983); Suggs Hopper, 234 Ga. 242, 215 S.E.2d 246 (1975); Clipper 295 Md. 303, 455 A.2d 973 Knowles, 275 S.C. 312, 270 133 (1980). several intermediate appellate courts. See, e.g., People Jackson, 626 P.2d 723 (Colo.App.1981); ex rel. Capalongo Howard, App.Div.2d 453 N.Y.S.2d (1982); Blackwell 828 (Tenn.Crim.App.1976). 878, 881, 1984) parole-and normal rules control over clearly One commentator noted: "Since rarely examined, suffer loss privileges proof indictment. Undoubtedly, sometimes exact punishment try feel conviction." Note, Correctional Process, 1966 Wash.U.L.Q. 417, 423 (footnote 358, 25, (1978) informality system, groundlessly bad faith). note "with bringing test substantiality Reports, 3; 4866. Eighth follows: "[T]he deprived concurrently filed; classified maximum risk; ineligible initial assignments security (i.e., honor forestry camp work); (4) trustee [sic ] status; (5) allowed preferred living quarters dormitories; (6) study-release programs; (7) transferred medium minimum includes removal youthful offenders; (8) jobs carry higher wages entitle [him] credits sentence; (9) inhibited denial commutation (10) hindered overall advantage opportunities." Cooper Lockhart, 489 308, 314, (8th Cir.1973). 30-31 ("[I]n conclusive violation"). arrest, until "has State"—that commenced serves vindicate constitutional "not usually involved." Some drafted, Sixth Amendment entitles penitentiary diligent, good-faith 575, (1969). Hooey Congress "would afford defendants diminish reversed right." 4864. 1-2; 14000 (remarks Rep. Poff); Sen. Hruska). least, enacted never held, hearing. (a constitutionally suggested, vindicating commentators recommended, differences resolving 81-83 (1979); 704-705 [Agreement] character, favor prisoner." 134 ed.). ("The supports [a hearing] right"). 1-page untitled memorandum judge, reciting "offenses [obviously unproven] Violation Probation." 6. characterized "probation characterization, question routinely labeled turn labels. 16, infra. Probationers further automatic law. Zachowski, N.J.Super. 431, 437, 147 584, 588 (1959); N.J.Stat.Ann., 2C:45-3(a)(2) 1982) (warrant offense"). adequate us. apparently extends conviction. easily arrests alone, "technical" violations, validity presumed. 2C:45-1(b) (conditions "meet[ing] family responsibilities," maintaining employment, continuing medical psychiatric "pursu[ing] prescribed course study," "refrain[ing] frequenting unlawful disreputable consorting persons," etc.). willing concede, arguendo, jurisdiction. assume 'uncertainties' concerning "less severe" regard outstanding-criminal-charge high rate prosecutions real imagines. assumptions advanced" employs defense, finds "strongly" 732-733. depends dual inherent substantiation. true, account "warrant detainer" current terminated. 74. go years, "[t]he administrator thwarted toward treatment. Right Speedy Trial Statutes, Rutgers L.Rev. 828, 832 (1964) thrust convict's per se, disabilities engendered him"). deleterious recognized recitation superfluous. helpful summary found Wexler Hershey, Nutshell, 753 (1971): "As carefully documented elsewhere, disabilities, ranging mandatory maximum-security classification exclusion vocational ineligibility parole." 12.01, 562-563 29-34, 85-87 Bennett, Last Full Ounce," Fed.Prob. (June 1959); (July-Sept. 1945) (entire devoted evils"). misunderstands resolve. uncertain "produced" "obstructs" 732 (discussing related guilt"). Prison inquire flimsy—if crime, inmate's level options. Dept. Justice, System, Statement 5100.2, §§ 9(B)(1), 11(A)(1) (1982). certain, effectively society." "It attempts rehabilitate corrosive." 379, 578, (1969) (citation stylistic punctuation joined "[W]ithdrawal late stage dubious benefit. done ended. Further, situation staff developing well-planned program release." 5, Administrator Views Detainers, 8, ("It pointless spend funds graduated institution"); Heyns, ("[N]o sound keep answering detainers"). laws typical. "may originally convicted." 2C:45-3(b) 1982). Any consecutively serving. 2C:44-5 1984-1985). despite proven 2C:45-3(a)(4) (court "may" violation). Similar guidelines resentencing. 30:4-123.60-123.65 National Advisory Commission Standards Goals, Standard 5.4(5) (1973) (upon conviction, decisions governed "criteria [that] gover[n] decisions"); 15; 646 ("Most jurisdictions" vast array sanctions revocation"). grants discretion, assertion, citation supportive authority, "probationer[s] [their] sentence[s]," surprising speculative. REHNQUIST criticized basing "first turn[ed] resorting extra-statutory aids." (dissenting) original). 733-734 (although "we alone" required). "When 'interpreting statute, look clause used, connection (or subject) objects indicated provisions, execution Legislature. .' Brown Duchesne, How. 183, 194 [15 L.Ed. 595] (1857)." Kokoszka Belford, 417 642, 650, 94 2431, 2436, 374 (1974). 2A C. Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction 46.07 (4th literal act prevail creates legislature"). "well-established canon construction," Bob Jones 461 586, 103 2017, 2025, 76 157 (1983), "liberally purposes." IX. 'brought trial,' 725, necessarily reported statistical studies report 46% 44% respectively, concededly small samples (1971); Fed.Prob., 15, 1. hand, up, 19% samples. Yackle, Taking Stock Loyola (LA) 88, (1975) unpublished survey claiming 69% nationwide charges). absence comprehensive, data rough generalizations, certainly safe say restriction leaves number beyond protection Attorney General al. Amici (surmising "significant number" They dismayed discover purpose—easing burdens States—also stands partially frustrated today. custody." IV, trigger provisions. desires resolve manner option using resort unsatisfactory join 94; ("[A]rticle declares IAD situations faces jurisdiction"). title belies attribution intent—we "Some" Detainers. buttress position examples presented First, recognizes well. "prosecuting officers" "courts," "because proceedings," currently view, "more appropriate" application. 727-728. officers departments proceedings, here, perfectly fulfilled case. More importantly, applied woodenly reads them. disposition," "liberally," analogous roles boards play system. office, prosecutors, objection complying makeweight "clearly 727, 5. not, undisposed "untried." Significantly, 1948 included representatives Administrators Association. amended unilaterally jurisdictions. Congress' 1970 "detainer" meant, 728-729, illegitimate; "post-passage remarks legislators, explicit, change intent." Regional Rail Reorganization Act Cases, 419 102, 132, 95 335, 320 entirely late-joining signing see, 731, (Congress rights), interpretations way alter understanding written. Subsequent narrowing legislators particularly came reaction Dickey Florida, 398 30, 90 1564, proposed 4, supra. why dismissed later contextually demonstrate intent, 728-729. Kentucky amend probation- Ky.Rev.Stat. 440.455(2) Kentucky's amendment expressly notes, "binding specifically execute same" amendment. 440.455(1). amendment, today's legislature frustrated. 98-225, ("[T]oday, outmoded model. almost everyone doubts induced reliably setting"); von Hirsch, Doing Justice: Choice Punishments xxxvii, 11-18 Bainbridge, Return Retribution, 71 ABA Journal 60 (May 1985). comparison, 1959 framers Director Bureau Prisons James V. termed vestigial remnant age-old retributive justice. except destructive expression primitive urge vengeance." 20. 104, 797, 799 (Smith, concurring) (since "useless," California back "holding taxpayers Arkansas ransom"). 733. delaying desirable, Ibid.; (disposition "cause[s] delivered" disposition). cruel irony takes choice away, unable lingers be, unless wants so. Crim.L.Bull., (statistics indicate "[p]arole detainers: remain longest"). 94, 282, "if hopes [federal Parole] prove lenient waive right" disposition. Reference arguments, alternative 728, renders veiled criticism Appeals' completely ineffective. appropriate.

Category: 0