United States v. Duane Jones

Bad Law
696 F.3d 932·2012 WL 4748824·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20815
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 5, 201212-50042California2,008 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thomas, J.

In this appeal from the district court’s revocation of supervised release, we consider whether the district court erred in treating a state criminal conviction as a felony rather than a misdemeanor, when the sole categorical difference was a recidivist history. We conclude that the district court properly considered the conviction as a felony. However, because the district court included a written special condition of supervised release that the court did not include in its oral pronouncement of sentence, we must vacate the judgment and remand for further proceedings.

I

In 2006, Duane Jones pleaded guilty to possessing counterfeit obligations with intent to defraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 472 . He was sentenced to 24 months in custody followed by 36 months of supervised release. Jones was subject to standard supervision conditions, including that he not commit any federal or state crimes. Prior to his federal conviction, Jones was convicted in California state court of indecent exposure.

In 2010, while on supervised release, Jones was again convicted in California state court of indecent exposure. California law specifies that an initial conviction of indecent…

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.