800 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir. 2015), 14-14993, United States v. Cunningham

Docket Nº:14-14993
Citation:800 F.3d 1290
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM:
Party Name:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -- Appellee, v. JOHN A. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant -- Appellant
Attorney:For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee: R. Brian Tanner, Jeffrey J. Buerstatte, James D. Durham, Joseph D. Newman, Brian T. Rafferty, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attorney's Office, SAVANNAH, GA. For JOHN A. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant - Appellant: Jason Monroe Tate, Roberts Tate, LLC, ST SIMONS ...
Judge Panel:Before ROSENBAUM and FAY, Circuit Judges, and MIDDLEBROOKS,[*] District Judge.
Case Date:September 02, 2015
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
SUMMARY

Defendant, originally sentenced to 30 months' imprisonment for failure to register as a sex offender, was sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment after the third revocation of his supervised release. On appeal, defendant contends that his revocation sentence was illegal because it exceeded the 14 months remaining on his then existing term of supervised release. The court followed its sister... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 1290

800 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir. 2015)

25 Fla.L.Weekly Fed. C 1567

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff -- Appellee,

v.

JOHN A. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant -- Appellant

No. 14-14993

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit

September 2, 2015

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia. D.C. Docket No. 2:08-cr-00024-LGW-RSB-1.

For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee: R. Brian Tanner, Jeffrey J. Buerstatte, James D. Durham, Joseph D. Newman, Brian T. Rafferty, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attorney's Office, SAVANNAH, GA.

For JOHN A. CUNNINGHAM, Defendant - Appellant: Jason Monroe Tate, Roberts Tate, LLC, ST SIMONS ISLAND, GA.

Before ROSENBAUM and FAY, Circuit Judges, and MIDDLEBROOKS,[*] District Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

John Cunningham appeals his sentence of 24 months' imprisonment imposed after the third revocation of his supervised release. He contends that his revocation sentence was illegal because it exceeded the 14 months remaining on his then existing term of supervised release.

I. Background

Cunningham was originally sentenced to 30 months of imprisonment followed by three years of supervised release for failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250 (a Class C felony).

Following his release from prison, Cunningham violated the terms of supervised release and was sentenced in August 2011 to eight months in prison followed by 24 additional months of supervised release. He violated his second term of supervised release and was sentenced in March 2013 to another 14 months in prison followed by 14 months of supervised release.

After completing his term in prison, he violated supervised release for a third time. At his revocation hearing, Cunningham argued that he could only be sentenced to a maximum of 14 months' imprisonment, the length of supervised release imposed at his last revocation. After a hearing and additional briefing, the district court sentenced Cunningham to 24 months in prison with no supervision to follow.

Cunningham timely appealed.

II. Standard of Review

We review de novo the legality of a sentence, including a sentence imposed pursuant to revocation of supervised release. United States v. Pla, 345 F.3d 1312, 1313 (11th Cir. 2003).

III. Discussion

A sentencing court may impose a term of supervised release following imprisonment as part of the sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(a). The authorized terms of supervised release are: (1) not more than five...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP