Topic
Every decision we've filed under Supervised Release.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court's revocation of supervised release and imposition of an eighteen-month prison term. The court held that the district court did not impermissibly rely on retributive factors when sentencing the defendant for violating her supervised release.
The First Circuit vacated a defendant's sentence because the district court failed to provide a sufficiently reasoned explanation for imposing a twenty-five-month upward variance above the Sentencing Guidelines range. This procedural error prevented the appellate court from reviewing the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, necessitating a remand for resentencing with proper justification.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a defendant's sentence for drug conspiracy despite arguments that the career offender enhancement was improperly applied. The court held that the sentence was substantively reasonable given the defendant's extensive criminal history and the seriousness of the offenses.
The Fourth Circuit vacated a supervised release revocation sentence because the district court misclassified a drug-testing violation as a Grade B offense instead of the correct Grade C classification. The court remanded the case for resentencing to apply the proper sentencing guidelines and address potential statutory limits on the term of supervised release.
The Eighth Circuit affirmed a district court's decision to revoke supervised release and impose a 24-month prison sentence. The court held that the defendant failed to prove plain error regarding delays caused by pending state charges or that the sentence was unreasonable.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of a new trial motion but vacated a sentence enhanced based on the defendant's status as a police officer. The court held that professional status is not a valid statutory factor for upward sentencing adjustments under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
The Tenth Circuit dismissed the direct appeal of a mail fraud defendant who had signed an appeal waiver, ruling that no valid claims fell outside the waiver's scope. The court found that enforcing the waiver would not result in a miscarriage of justice and directed any ineffective assistance claims to be raised in a collateral proceeding.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of James Nemeth's motions to suppress evidence and dismiss charges, ruling that his Fourth Amendment argument was procedurally waived and his Second Amendment challenge is foreclosed by binding precedent. The court held that Nemeth failed to preserve the specific claim that a dog sniff at his motel door violated his privacy interest inside the room, and his challenge to the felon-in-possession statute is barred by the circuit's recent decision in Vincent v. Bondi.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the denial of a federal prisoner's motion for compassionate release, ruling that challenges to sentencing guideline calculations must be brought via habeas corpus rather than compassionate release proceedings. The court held that the defendant's argument effectively attacked the validity of his plea agreement and sentence, which falls outside the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A).
The Fifth Circuit affirmed the revocation of Maurice Coleman's supervised release and his 18-month prison sentence. The court held that Coleman's constitutional challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g) is foreclosed by its prior decision in United States v. Garner.