DC · rules
D.C. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 35
Correcting or Reducing a Sentence or Collateral; Setting Aside Forfeiture
(a) Correcting the Sentence. The court may correct an illegal sentence at any time and
may correct a sentence imposed in an illegal manner within the time provided herein for
the reduction of sentence.
(b) Reducing a Sentence.
(1) Upon Motion. A motion to reduce a sentence may be made not later than 120 days
after the sentence is imposed or probation is revoked, or not later than 120 days after
receipt by the court of a mandate issued upon affirmance of the judgment or dismissal
of the appeal, or not later than 120 days after entry of any order or judgment of the
Supreme Court denying review of, or having the effect of upholding, a judgment of
conviction or probation revocation. The court must decide a motion within a reasonable
time.
(2) Sua Sponte by the Court. After notice to the parties and an opportunity to be
heard, the court may reduce a sentence without motion, not later than 120 days after
the sentence is imposed or probation is revoked, or not later than 120 days after receipt
by the court of a mandate issued upon affirmance of the judgment or dismissal of the
appeal, or not later than 120 days after entry of any order or judgment of the Supreme
Court denying review of, or having the effect of upholding, a judgment of conviction or
probation revocation.
(3) Permissible Reduction. Changing a sentence from a sentence of incarceration to a
grant of probation constitutes a permissible reduction of sentence under this paragraph.
(c) Imposition of Sentence Defined. For purposes of this rule, a sentence is imposed
when it is orally announced.
(d) Setting Aside Forfeiture. No forfeiture of collateral security or of an unsecured
personal appearance bond shall be vacated unless application is made within 90 days
after forfeiture and upon good cause shown.
(e) Reducing Collateral in Traffic Cases. The amount of collateral security required in a
traffic case may be reduced by a judge or magistrate judge only if (1) such reduction
has been specifically recommended in writing by the attorney for the government on a
form separate from the notice of violation, or (2) the judge or magistrate judge states the
reasons for the reduction in writing on a form separate from the notice of violation. In all
such cases the clerk's office shall submit a monthly report of such reductions to the
Chief Judge.
History
COMMENT TO 2016 AMENDMENTS This rule has been redrafted to conform to the general restyling of the federal rules in 2002. It differs from the federal rule in several respects. Paragraph (b) of this rule reflects longstanding differences between the federal and local rules governing the basis and timing of motions to reduce sentence. Paragraph (c) is new to both the local and federal rules. Although the wording is different, the meaning is intended to be the same. Paragraph (d) of this rule, dealing with setting aside a forfeiture of collateral security, and paragraph (e), dealing with reduction of collateral in traffic cases, have no federal counterparts. In addition, paragraph (e) of this rule, formerly paragraph (d), substitutes the clerk's office for the Central Violations Bureau as the entity that will submit reports of traffic collateral reductions to the Chief Judge. The Central Violations Bureau no longer exists.
Provenance
- Source
- dccourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-14
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
773518e42f4b5992cc14985e27f8e2cb85e6044eef3f75a401fab77b0f7a94c6
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.