United States v. Bennett Williams

Good Law
585 F. App'x 398
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 9, 201413-10307California340 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Bennett Laquan Williams appeals from the district court’s order revoking his supervised release, sentencing him to twelve months in prison, and imposing a new forty-eight month term of supervised release. Specifically, Williams argues that the magistrate judge who accepted his admission to a supervised release violation lacked the authority to do so. Williams also contends that the district court failed to properly inform him of the maximum penalty at the time of his admission. We assume that all parties are familiar with the facts of this case and only recite those facts necessary to this disposition. We affirm.

Discussion

A. Authority of the Magistrate Judge

In United States v. Sanchez-Sanchez, 333 F.3d 1065, 1070 (9th Cir.2003), we held that in order for a magistrate judge to preside over a revocation hearing a district judge must have “designate^] the magistrate judge to conduct the revocation hearing” and the defendant must give “express consent.” Both requirements are met here. Prior to the hearing before the magistrate judge Williams consented to “go forward with [his] ... Admission or Denial Hearing on Petition for Revocation of ... Supervised Release_”…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.