| 词条 | Barber v. Thomas |
| 释义 |
| Litigants = Barber v. Thomas | ArgueDate = March 30 | ArgueYear = 2010 | DecideDate = June 7 | DecideYear = 2010 | FullName = Michael Gary Barber, et al., Petitioners v. J. E. Thomas, Warden | USVol = 560 | USPage = 474 | Docket = 09-5201 | ParallelCitations = 130 S. Ct. 2499; 177 L. Ed. 2d 1; 78 USLW 4509; 10 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6983; 2010 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8311; 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 419 | Prior = | Subsequent = | Holding = A federal inmate who demonstrates "good behavior," is entitled to 54 days credit for every year of actual imprisonment. | SCOTUS = 2009-2010 | Majority = Breyer | JoinMajority = Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor | Dissent = Kennedy | JoinDissent = Stevens, Ginsburg | LawsApplied = }}Barber v. Thomas, 560 U.S. 474 (2010), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. It concerned how the United States Federal Bureau of Prisons should calculate "good time credits", reduced sentences for inmates who stayed out of trouble while in custody.[1] BackgroundThe petitioner, Michael Barber, sought habeas corpus in a federal district court. He argued that the Bureau of Prisons "inaccurately calculated his good time credit toward the service of his federal sentence." Barber argued that the BOP should have calculated good time credit based on the sentence imposed rather than the time actually served in prison. Barbers petition was denied by the district court, on appeal the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the lower courts citing Tablada v. Daniels noting that the good time credit statute was ambiguous and the BOP's interpretation was reasonable.[2] Opinion of the CourtThe court affirmed the lower court's ruling with a 6–3 vote. Barber's attorneys argued that by allowing up to 54 days' credit for each year "of the prisoner's term of imprisonment," Congress intended federal sentences to be reduced by as much as 54 days for each year of the sentence imposed by the judge. The government argued that the reduction applied at the end of each year that is actually served. Under that interpretation, which prevailed, since the sentence keeps being reduced year after year, less credit in total is awarded. The difference is about one week per year for every federal prisoner serving a term of more than a year's duration. Justice Stephen Breyer wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Kennedy wrote the dissent. See also
References1. ^Supreme Court justices have a good time debating 'good time' 2. ^{{cite web|title=Barber v. Thomas 560 US _____(2010)|url=https://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2009/2009_09_5201|publisher=Oyez: Chicago Kent College of Law|accessdate=11 January 2014}} External links
| case = Barber v. Thomas, {{ussc|560|474|2010|el=no}} | justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/560/474/ | oyez =https://www.oyez.org/cases/2009/09-5201 | other_source1 = Supreme Court (slip opinion) | other_url1 =https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/09-5201.pdf
4 : United States Supreme Court cases|United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court|2010 in United States case law|United States sentencing case law |
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。