Rico v. United States
Issues
When an individual on supervised release absconds, does the clock on their supervision time pause, such that the time while missing does not count toward serving the supervised release term?
This case asks the Supreme Court to decide whether a term of supervised release automatically extends if a releasee absconds from supervision. Petitioner Isabel Rico absconded while serving a term of supervised release related to a drug trafficking offense. If Rico’s timer for supervised release was paused while in abscondment, her total punishment would be longer than if it were running. The district court applied the fugitive tolling doctrine, which means that the timer stopped when the releasee is missing, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed her extended sentence. Rico argues that the timer on a term of supervised release does not stop while a releasee is missing. Rico claims that the statute authorizing supervised release clearly does not authorize the use of the fugitive tolling doctrine. In response, the United States argues that the fugitive tolling doctrine must extend to absconders like Rico, that supervision only counts when the defendant is actively under oversight, and that the court should not allow for absconders to manipulate their sentence. This case’s outcome has significant implications on the fairness and rehabilitation for supervised releasees.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether the fugitive-tolling doctrine applies in the context of supervised release?
Additional Resources
- Phillip Bantz, Justices To Resolve Split On Supervised Release Fugitives, Law360 (June 30, 2025).
- Rory Little, Criminal case arguments in the November sitting, SCOTUSblog (Oct. 29, 2025).
- Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson, Supreme Court to Consider Power of Judges to Sentence Fugitives,Bloomberg Law (June 30, 2025).