Perkins

United States v. Perkins

Good Law
32 F. App'x 936
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 1, 2002No. 01-10406; D.C. No. CR-86-00600-VRWCalifornia416 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*937 MEMORANDUM **

Joseph Perkins appeals from the district court’s order revoking his probation. We affirm.

Because the underlying offense in this case was committed prior to November 1, 1987, the Sentencing Guidelines do not apply. See United States v. Molinaro, 11 F.3d 853, 864 (9th Cir.1993). Under the relevant statute at the time, the district court was empowered to “revoke or modify any condition of probation, or [] change the period of probation” provided that “[t]he period of probation, together with any extension thereof, [did] not exceed five years.” 18 U.S.C. § 3651 (repealed Nov. 1, 1987). A district court does not have authority to revoke a probationary sentence once it has expired. United States v. Freeman, 922 F.2d 1393, 1394-95 (9th Cir.1991). Perkins argues that the five-year period had run by May 12, 2000, the date upon which the district issued the arrest warrant based on probation violations.

Perkins’ probation began on July 16, 1993 when he was released from federal prison on parole. Uninterrupted, his probation would have terminated in July 1998. The five-year period, however, is tolled for any time “during which [the probationer] was not in fact under…

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.