{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "35",
    "document_number": "663",
    "date": "06/15/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 663 Filed 06/15/22 Page 35 of 77\n\nmore than prisoners in mainstream conditions, it follows that proportionality requires the severity of confinement be factored into sentencing. Courts sentence convicted offenders to prison as punishment. Courts order pretrial defendants detained to safeguard the community and to ensure presence at court proceedings, not for punishment. In evaluating the nature and extent of punishment, it is important to factor in the actual impact of the hardship on the defendant. If detention imposes an additional burden on a certain category of defendants, it is necessary to incorporate the actual total burden of the punishment into sentencing calibrations.\n\nThe principle of proportionality requires that the additional burden experienced by Ms. Maxwell during the 22 months spent is in supermax-type conditions should be factored into the Court's sentencing calculus. Based on the underpinnings of punishment and the principle of proportionality, a hard-time credit for Ms. Maxwell's unusual detention is warranted. Imprisonment in any form is a severe hardship. This is especially so when a person presumed to be innocent is detained pretrial. The standard measure for evaluating the hardship of incarceration is the length of the prison term, i.e., a value is placed on this quantitative measure when assessing damages for wrongful conviction. Regardless of whether there is an objective mathematical formula for Ms. Maxwell's unique situation, a meaningful credit is warranted.27\n\nThere is a manifestly stark qualitative difference in the degree of deprivation, restriction, and punishment between the first 22 months of Ms. Maxwell's detention and her current detention in general population. Her detention in isolation – de facto solitary confinement comparable to\n\n27 Compensation determinations for individuals wrongfully incarcerated is illustrative. Thirty-six states and Washington, DC, have laws that offer compensation for exonerees. The federal standard to compensate those who are wrongfully convicted is a minimum of $50,000 per year of incarceration, plus an additional $50,000 for each year spent on death row. See https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4019/text?r=13&s=1, The enhanced compensation for incarceration on death row recognizes the qualitative severity of punishment beyond that which non-capital inmates are exposed.\n\n34\nDOJ-OGR-00010481",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 663 Filed 06/15/22 Page 35 of 77",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "more than prisoners in mainstream conditions, it follows that proportionality requires the severity of confinement be factored into sentencing. Courts sentence convicted offenders to prison as punishment. Courts order pretrial defendants detained to safeguard the community and to ensure presence at court proceedings, not for punishment. In evaluating the nature and extent of punishment, it is important to factor in the actual impact of the hardship on the defendant. If detention imposes an additional burden on a certain category of defendants, it is necessary to incorporate the actual total burden of the punishment into sentencing calibrations.",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "The principle of proportionality requires that the additional burden experienced by Ms. Maxwell during the 22 months spent is in supermax-type conditions should be factored into the Court's sentencing calculus. Based on the underpinnings of punishment and the principle of proportionality, a hard-time credit for Ms. Maxwell's unusual detention is warranted. Imprisonment in any form is a severe hardship. This is especially so when a person presumed to be innocent is detained pretrial. The standard measure for evaluating the hardship of incarceration is the length of the prison term, i.e., a value is placed on this quantitative measure when assessing damages for wrongful conviction. Regardless of whether there is an objective mathematical formula for Ms. Maxwell's unique situation, a meaningful credit is warranted.27",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "There is a manifestly stark qualitative difference in the degree of deprivation, restriction, and punishment between the first 22 months of Ms. Maxwell's detention and her current detention in general population. Her detention in isolation – de facto solitary confinement comparable to",
      "position": "main body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "27 Compensation determinations for individuals wrongfully incarcerated is illustrative. Thirty-six states and Washington, DC, have laws that offer compensation for exonerees. The federal standard to compensate those who are wrongfully convicted is a minimum of $50,000 per year of incarceration, plus an additional $50,000 for each year spent on death row. See https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4019/text?r=13&s=1, The enhanced compensation for incarceration on death row recognizes the qualitative severity of punishment beyond that which non-capital inmates are exposed.",
      "position": "footnote"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "34",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010481",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [
      "Washington, DC"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "06/15/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "663",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010481"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing discussing the sentencing of Ms. Maxwell, with a focus on the proportionality of her detention and potential credits for her time served. The text is well-formatted and clear, with a footnote providing additional context on compensation for wrongfully incarcerated individuals."
}