Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Campbell

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

February 28, 2018

United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Theresa Helena Campbell, Defendant-Appellant.

          Argued and Submitted December 7, 2017 Pasadena, California

         Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Beverly Reid O'Connell, District Judge, Presiding D.C. No. 2:16-cr-00387-BRO-1

          Caleb E. Mason (argued) and Scott L. Menger, Brown White & Osborn LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellant.

          Thomas F. Rybarczyk (argued), Assistant United States Attorney, General Crimes Section; Lawrence S. Middleton, Chief, Criminal Division; Sandra R. Brown, United States Attorney; United States Attorney's Office, Los Angeles, California; for Plaintiff-Appellee.

          Before: Kim McLane Wardlaw and Ronald M. Gould, Circuit Judges, and Raner C. Collins, [*] Chief District Judge.

         SUMMARY[**]

         Criminal Law

         Vacating the district court's order revoking supervised release and remanding for further proceedings, the panel held that 18 U.S.C. § 3583(i), which extends the power to revoke a term of supervised release even after the term has expired, does not empower a district court to base a revocation upon violations which (1) were not alleged prior to the expiration period and (2) are not otherwise factually related to a matter raised in a signed warrant or summons issued before expiration.

          OPINION

          COLLINS, Chief District Judge

         Theresa Helena Campbell[1] ("Campbell") appeals the district court's order revoking her supervised release and sentencing her to a year and a day imprisonment. We are called upon to decide whether the district court lacked authority to issue that order. In doing so, we must consider, as a matter of first impression in this circuit, the parameters of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(i), which extends the power of a court to revoke a term of supervised release even after the term has expired. More specifically, we must settle whether a court may base a revocation upon violations which (1) were not alleged prior to the expiration of the supervision period, and (2) are not otherwise factually related to any matter raised before the court during the supervision period. For the reasons explained below, we conclude that district courts are not so empowered.

         I. Background

         A. Campbell's Conviction, Sentence, and Terms of Supervised Release

         On January 9, 2014 Campbell, having pleaded guilty to mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341, was sentenced by a district court in the Eastern District of California to 18 months imprisonment and 36 months of subsequent supervised release. Campbell was further ordered to pay $85, 592 in restitution.

          Campbell's supervised release commenced on February 15, 2014. Among the conditions imposed were requirements that she (1) truthfully answer all inquiries made by the United States Probation Officer ("USPO") assigned to oversee her supervised release and, further, follow instructions issued by said USPO; (2) notify the USPO within 72 hours of being arrested or questioned by a law enforcement officer; and (3) not open additional lines of credit without approval from the USPO. On June 7, 2016 jurisdiction over ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.