Blake

United States v. Blake

Good Law
88 F.3d 824·96 Daily Journal DAR 8284·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 16393·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5139
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 1996Nos. 96-30057, 96-30059, 96-30061 to 96-30063, 96-30067California638 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Goodwin, J.

This appeal raises one question: when a criminal defendant’s sentence of imprisonment is reduced below the time he has already served, due to a retroactive change in the sentencing guidelines, does his supervised release obligation commence on the date of his actual release or on the date he should have been released according to his revised sentence?

We conclude that, while the statutory scheme is not crystal clear, the supervised release portion of the sentence begins on the date a prisoner’s term of imprisonment expires, whether or not he is released on that date. The appellants’ terms of supervised release began on the dates appellants should have been released, rather than on the dates of their actual release.

I. Sentencing Court

Appellants in these consolidated cases were each convicted for growing marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a) and sentenced to a term of imprisonment plus a statutoiy three years of supervised release. In November, 1995, each received a reduction in his custodial sentence by reason of a retroactive amendment to the sentencing guidelines which affected the manner of calculating the quantity of marijuana for sentencing purposes. Each had…

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.