The question
Whether a First Step Act offender whose pre-Act sentence was later vacated is one for whom a sentence "has not been imposed" under Section 403(b), so that the Act's more lenient penalties apply at resentencing.
Hewitt v. United States
What the Court decided
The Court reversed the Fifth Circuit and remanded. A First Step Act offender whose prior Section 924(c) sentence was vacated is entitled to the Act's reduced 5-year mandatory minimums at resentencing rather than the pre-Act stacked 25-year minimums. Under Section 403(b), a sentence "has . . . been imposed" only if it remains extant, because Congress used the present-perfect tense and because a vacated sentence is void ab initio and has no continuing legal effect.
How the justices split
5-4The Court's opinion in part
Jackson, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch
Delivered the opinion of the Court as to Parts I, II, and III. Section 403(b) uses the present-perfect tense, which asks whether a sentence continues to have present validity rather than whether one occurred as a historical fact. Because a vacated sentence is void ab initio and has no prospective legal effect, an offender whose prior Section 924(c) sentence was vacated is one upon whom a sentence has not been imposed, so the Act's reduced penalties apply at resentencing.
The plurality in part
Jackson, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan
Filed an opinion as to Parts IV and V, joined only by Sotomayor and Kagan. Roberts and Gorsuch did not join these parts, so they did not command a Court majority.
Dissenting
Alito, joined by Thomas, Kavanaugh, Barrett
Filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett, disagreeing that offenders whose prior sentences were vacated qualify for the First Step Act's more lenient mandatory minimums under Section 403(b).
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court reversed the Fifth Circuit's judgment and remanded the cases.
Source: syllabus, Held
Under Section 403(b) of the First Step Act, a sentence has been imposed only if it is extant and has not been vacated.
Source: syllabus, Held
The Court's reasoning rested on Congress's use of the present-perfect tense and on the principle that vacated orders are void ab initio with no prospective legal effect.
Source: syllabus, Held
Justice Jackson delivered the opinion of the Court as to Parts I, II, and III, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Gorsuch.
Source: syllabus, lineup
Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Thomas, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
Source: syllabus, lineup