Xinidakis

United States v. Xinidakis

Good Law
598 F.3d 1213·2010 WL 1131490·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 6186
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 25, 201009-50307California1,776 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rymer, J.

We must decide whether 18 U.S.C. § 3624 (e) prohibits a district court from imposing consecutive sentences of imprisonment where a defendant violates concurrent terms of supervised release. Although we answered this question negatively in United States v. Jackson, 176 F.3d 1175 (9th Cir.1999) (per curiam), David Xinidakis argues that Jackson has been undermined by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694 , 120 S.Ct. 1795 , 146 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000). We disagree. Jackson remains the law of this circuit, and controls. Multiple revocations of concurrent terms of supervised release may result in consecutive time; there is no legal requirement that they must result in concurrent time. Accordingly, we affirm.

I

Xinidakis was convicted on May 6, 1999, in the Western District of Texas of bank robbery, using and carrying a firearm during a crime of violence, and conspiracy to carry a firearm during a crime of violence. He was sentenced to a total of 123 months imprisonment, and 5 years of supervised release on each count to run concurrently. He was released from custody and began his term of supervised release on August 1, 2006.

In May 2008 a…

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.