Topic
Every decision we've filed under Supervised Release.
The Tenth Circuit affirmed the conviction of a felon for possessing a firearm. The court held that existing precedent forecloses the defendant's constitutional challenge to the federal statute.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence of Louis Charles Younglove for drug distribution. The court held that officers had probable cause for a warrantless arrest and that the district court properly conducted a de novo resentencing.
The First Circuit vacated a federal sentence for a prohibited person in possession of a firearm, ruling that prior state drug convictions did not qualify as controlled substance offenses under federal sentencing guidelines. The court remanded the case for resentencing because the district court erred in calculating the defendant's base offense level.
The Fifth Circuit affirmed a criminal sentence involving illegal reentry and supervised release conditions. The court held that the defendant's challenge to a probation officer's notification authority was foreclosed by existing circuit precedent.
The Fifth Circuit held that an appeal from a supervised release revocation is not moot when the challenged conditions formed the basis for a subsequent revocation. The court vacated two conditions that were not orally pronounced at sentencing and dismissed the remainder of the appeal as moot.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a twenty-month prison sentence for illegal reentry following a felony removal. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in weighing sentencing factors or in rejecting the defendant's claimed purpose for reentry.
The Fifth Circuit denied a motion by appointed counsel to withdraw from representing a defendant who waived his right to appeal. The court found a non-frivolous argument existed regarding a financial disclosure condition on supervised release.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the denial of a motion to dismiss a wire fraud indictment. The court held that a prior plea agreement with a different U.S. Attorney's office did not bar prosecution by the Central District of Illinois.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed a criminal forfeiture order despite the district court's procedural delays and failure to include the forfeiture in the initial judgment, ruling that the errors were harmless and did not warrant vacatur.
The Fifth Circuit vacated part of a district court judgment where standard supervised release conditions were not orally pronounced at sentencing. The court remanded the case for the district court to amend the written judgment to align with the oral pronouncement.