United States v. Frank F. Colacurcio, Sr.

Bad Law
84 F.3d 326·96 Daily Journal DAR 5660·1996 WL 257611·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 11436·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3472
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 17, 199695-30362California3,469 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

Defendant Frank F. Colaeurcio appeals the district court’s order revoking his probation in a felony case and sentencing him to 36 months imprisonment. A federal magistrate judge held a probation revocation hearing under a district court local rule without defendant’s consent. After .the hearing, the magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation, which the district court adopted. The district court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 (1996). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1996).

We must decide whether a magistrate judge has authority under the Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636 (1996), to conduct a probation revocation hearing without defendant’s consent. We reverse and remand. We hold that a magistrate judge has authority to conduct a probation revocation hearing only with defendant’s consent and only for probation imposed in a misdemeanor case. On remand, the district court is instructed to conduct a new probation revocation hearing.

BACKGROUND

The underlying facts are not in dispute. On April 12, 1991, the defendant plead guilty to a felony, aiding and assisting in the preparation and presentation of false corporate tax returns for 1984. The…

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.