U.S. v. Shaw

Dist. Ct. erred in imposing 2-year term of incarceration after revoking defendant’s supervised release. Under Tapia, 564 U.S. 319, federal courts are precluded from imposing or lengthening prison terms to promote offender’s rehabilitation, and record showed through Dist. Ct.’s explanation that it was imposing instant sentence, which was 10 months above Guideline range, because of desire to rehabilitate defendant. Ct. of Appeals rejected government’s argument that Dist. Ct.’s reference to defendant’s rehabilitation was only afterthought, where Ct. of Appeals found that defendant’s rehabilitation was primary reason for length of instant sentence.