Wells

United States v. Wells

Good Law
30 F. App'x 700
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 25, 2002No. 01-30091; D.C. No. CR-95-00011-RHWCalifornia841 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Vincent Neal Wells appeals the district court’s revocation of his supervised release and imposition of a 21-month sentence of imprisonment following his admission that he had violated the conditions of his release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Wells’ counsel has submitted a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 , 87 S.Ct. 1396 , 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. Wells has filed a pro se supplemental brief. Because we conclude that there are no arguable issues for review, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

Counsel has identified one potential issue for review: whether a defendant who has already served the statutory maximum term of imprisonment for the underlying offense of conviction may be sentenced to an additional term of imprisonment for violation of supervised release. We agree that this issue lacks merit based on our decision in United States v. Purvis, 940 F.2d 1276, 1279 (9th Cir.1991) (concluding that 18 U.S.C. § 3583 authorizes revocation of supervised release even where the resulting incarceration, combined with the term of incarceration for the substantive offense, exceeds…

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.