Taylor
United States v. Taylor
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Vinsel Taylor appeals the sentence imposed following revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 . We affirm.
Taylor’s supervised release was revoked for failing to comply with his conditions of release, and the district court imposed a 14 month prison term followed by an additional 12 months of supervised release. Although 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (h) affords the district courts discretion to order a renewed term of supervised release, Taylor argues that the district court abused its discretion in this case because ordering an additional term violated Congress’ goals for supervised release and the spirit of his sentence arrangement with the government.
The United States Supreme Court recently observed that “Congress aimed [ ] to use the district court’s discretionary judgment to allocate supervision to those releasees who [need] it most.” Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 709 , 120 S.Ct. 1795 , 146 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000) (“... forbidding the reimposition of supervised release after revocation and reimprisonment would be fundamentally contrary to [Congress’] scheme”). Here, the district court determined that…