Can rehabilitation justify a longer prison sentence? On Tuesday, in an interesting case, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said no.

Other circuits have said otherwise, which is one of the reason why the sealed cased decided Tuesday is worth a look. The facts alone are worth a look.

The 56-year-old gentlemen involved was sentenced to 11 years in prison after pleading guilty to distributing 2.1 grams of heroin. His name is kept under seal because, as part of a plea agreement, he forked over some information about other bad guys. The information proved not very useful, but isn't why the trial judge sentenced him to the 11 years. Said the trial judge, U.S. District Judge John D. Bates:

"I do think that the defendant may benefit from some of the programs and educational training and the
medical treatment that is available in the federal prison system, and that would actually be more
available and more useful for the defendant over a somewhat longer period of time than it would over a
very short period of time."

Circuit Split Alert: the 2nd and 3rd Circuits have ruled that promoting rehab is not a valid and sufficient reason for imposing a longer sentence, while the 9th and 8th Circuit have ruled it can be. Citing strict statutory language, the D.C. Circuit opines:

"In deciding how long to keep a defendant in prison, sentencing courts may not use imprisonment as a means of rehabilitation."