Johnson v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Souter
The issue in this case grows out of an Ex Post Facto Clause challenge to the retroactive application of 18 U. S. C. § 3583(h), which authorizes a district court to impose an additional term of supervised release following the reimprisonment of those who violate the conditions of an initial term. The United States argues that district courts had the power to do so under the prior law, and that this cures any ex post facto problems. We agree with the Government as to the interpretation of prior law, and we find that consideration of the Ex Post Facto Clause is unnecessary.
I
In the Sentencing…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Gagnon v. ScarpelliSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- California Department of Corrections v. MoralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by748 opinions
- Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Ortiz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2002
- Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P. A. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- United States v. HaymondSupreme Court of the United States · 2019
- United States v. GarfinkleCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2001
743 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.