United States v. Tapia, No. 09-50248 (9th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseIn sentencing defendant following her conviction on immigration and bail-jumping charges, the district court made a number of comments suggesting that the length of the sentence imposed was determined at least in part by a desire to ensure that defendant received drug treatment while in prison. The court affirmed defendant's sentence but the Supreme Court reversed, remanding to the court to determine whether defendant was entitled to relief despite her failure to object to her sentence when it was imposed. The court held that the district court's consideration of defendant's rehabilitative needs in determining her sentence constituted plain error. Therefore, the court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing.
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.