United States v. Savastio, 061119 FED2, 17-2149
|Party Name:||United States of America, Appellee, v. Joseph A. Savastio, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Attorney:||For Appellee: Paul D. Silver, for Grant C. Jaquith, United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Syracuse, NY. For Defendant-Appellant: Arthur R. Frost, Frost & Kavanaugh, P.C., Troy, NY.|
|Judge Panel:||Present Debra Ann Livingston, Gerard E. Lynch, Richard J. Sullivan, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||June 11, 2019|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit|
RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT'S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION "SUMMARY ORDER"). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL.
At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 11th day of June, two thousand nineteen.
Appeal from a July 5, 2017 judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York (McAvoy, J.).
For Appellee: Paul D. Silver, for Grant C. Jaquith, United States Attorney for the Northern District of New York, Syracuse, NY.
For Defendant-Appellant: Arthur R. Frost, Frost & Kavanaugh, P.C., Troy, NY.
Present Debra Ann Livingston, Gerard E. Lynch, Richard J. Sullivan, Circuit Judges.
UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Defendant-Appellant Joseph A. Savastio ("Savastio") previously pled guilty to possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A, on two separate occasions: first in 2000 and then again in 2009. After completing a prison sentence in connection with the 2009 guilty plea, Savastio commenced a term of supervised release on January 21, 2017. On June 15, 2017, the Probation Office filed a petition alleging that Savastio had violated several special conditions of that supervised release by (1) using and possessing Internet-capable devices outside of Probation Office supervision; (2) entering a public library, where children under 18 were likely to congregate; and (3) possessing adult pornography. On June 28, 2017, the district court (McAvoy, J.) sentenced Savastio principally to a nine-month term of imprisonment to be followed by a life term of supervised release. The district court entered judgment against Savastio on July 5. A panel of this Court denied Savastio's counsel's Anders motion, Motion Order, No. 17-2149 (2d Cir. June 8, 2018), ECF No. 52, and this timely appeal followed. We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.
On appeal, Savastio limits his challenge to three special conditions that the district court imposed on his supervised release. Those three conditions provide as follows: 6. You must not use or possess any computer, data storage device, or any internet capable device...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP