United States v. Miller

I. Introduction

A. Background

Richard Miller appeals the district court’s denial of his “Motion to Dismiss Revocation Petition and Request for Immediate Release from Custody” (“Motion to Dismiss”). Relying primarily on United States v. Sullivan, 504 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2007), Miller argues that the district court lacked jurisdiction to revoke his supervised release and sentence him because, according to Miller, at the time the violation occurred, his supervised release term had ended.

We affirm the district court’s conclusion that Sullivan does not apply here. Unlike the defendant in Sullivan, Miller was transferred to the Bannock County Jail Work Release Program1 (hereinafter “Bannock County Jail” or “Work Release Pro- gram”) while still serving his federal sentence. This transfer occurred pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c), under which Miller remained “imprisoned” and under the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) until his release from Bannock County Jail. 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c) (2008), amended by Pub. L. 110- 117, Title V, § 505, Jan. 7, 2008, 121 Stat. 2542.2 Sullivan, by contrast, involved a state prisoner in Montana who, while serving a state sentence, was transferred…