United States v. Deen, No. 11-2271 (6th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDeen was convicted of distributing five grams or more of cocaine base and sentenced to prison for 66 months, followed by four years of supervised release. Deen began his supervised release in 2011. Months later, at a revocation hearing, Deen pleaded guilty to violations stemming from domestic violence incidents, alcohol use, and failure to report and to attend behavioral therapy. The government pushed for “a significant term of imprisonment where [Deen] hopefully can get some treatment for alcohol abuse, and perhaps counseling in terms of anger management.” The court sentenced Deen to 24 months’ imprisonment, followed by 24 months of supervised release. The judge explained her decision in terms of the goal of rehabilitation. In 2012, Deen and the government jointly requested that this court vacate Deen’s sentence and remand for resentencing in light of the Supreme Court decision, Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382 (2011), that hat the Sentencing Reform Act does not permit a court to “impose or lengthen a prison sentence to enable an offender to complete a treatment program or otherwise to promote rehabilitation.” The Sixth Circuit vacated, holding that the bar on sentencing decisions based on rehabilitative needs applies equally to supervised-release sentences.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.