Brief filed: 08/21/2025
Documents
Isabel Rico v. United States of America
United States Supreme Court; Case No. 24-1056
Prior Decision
Decision Below: United States v. Rico, No. 24-2662, 2025 WL 720900 (9th Cir. Mar. 6, 2025).
Argument(s)
This case involves the question of whether fugitive tolling applies in the context of supervised release. Petitioner argues that fugitive tolling does not apply based on statutory construction and that the government’s supervised-release theory departs from common law principles. NACDL’s amicus brief provides a complementary analysis arguing that the government’s supervised-release fugitive tolling theory distorts the equity principle that “no man may take advantage of his own wrong,” and that true fugitive tolling based on that maxim operates as a shield to deny wrongdoers unearned benefits, not as a sword to impose additional punishment. In the supervised release context, the government’s theory fails because: (1) absconders gain no meaningful benefit since they remain subject to all supervision conditions and revocation procedures; and (2) the theory imposes punishment by extending supervision terms beyond their scheduled end and allowing post-expiration conduct to enhance Guidelines ranges. NACDL further argues that the government’s theory violates core criminal law protections, including due process (by creating vague standards for what constitutes absconding), double jeopardy (by increasing finalized sentences), and the Sixth Amendment (by allowing non-jury findings to extend punishment beyond statutory limits). The brief argues this betrays equity’s protective function and undermines the rehabilitative purposes of supervised release.
Author(s)
Adeel M. Bashir, Sentencing Resource Counsel, National Sentencing Resource Counsel, Federal Public and Community Defenders, Eleventh Circuit Vice-Chair, NACDL Amicus Curiae Committee, Tampa, Florida; Jeffrey L. Fisher, National Co-Chair, NACDL Amicus Curiae Committee, Stanford University Law School, CA.
