Benson

United States v. Benson

Good Law
61 F. App'x 505
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 22, 2003No. 02-50287; D.C. No. CR-96-01881-1-RMBCalifornia332 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Defendant Adekunbo Benson (aka Sean Banji Howard) appeals from the 49-month sentence imposed by the district court upon revocation of Defendant’s supervised release in June 2002. We affirm.

1. Citing Rule 32(h) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Burns v. United States, 501 U.S. 129, 138-39 , 111 S.Ct. 2182 , 115 L.Ed.2d 123 (1991), Defendant argues that the district court erred by failing to provide him with notice of the court’s intention to “depart upward” from the Sentencing Guidelines before sentencing Defendant for violating the terms of his supervised release. Defendant’s argument must fail. The U.S. Sentencing Commission has never issued binding Guidelines relating to sentencing for violations of supervised release. Chapter 7, which relates to violations of supervised release, contains “neither guidelines nor interpretations or explanations of guidelines” but merely “policy statements [that] are not binding on the sentencing judge.” United States v. George, 184 F.3d 1119, 1121 (9th Cir.1999). Because there were no binding Guidelines from which the district court could “depart,” Defendant was not entitled to notice. United States v. Garcia, 323…

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.