McMurray

MEMORANDUM **

Oscar McMurray appeals the 40-month supervised release term imposed following revocation of his initial supervised release term. McMurray contends that the imposition of the additional term of supervised release violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because McMurray did not raise this issue in the district court, we review for plain error, see United States v. Antonakeas, 255 F.3d 714, 727 (9th Cir.2001), and we affirm.

When McMurray originally was placed on supervised release in 1993, a district court could not revoke a defendant’s supervised release term, and impose both a new term of incarceration and another term of supervised release. See United States v. Behnezhad, 907 F.2d 896, 898 (9th Cir.1990) (interpreting version of 18 U.S.C. § 3583 in effect in 1990). McMurray concedes that Behnezhad has been overruled by the Supreme Court. See Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 712 , 120 S.Ct. 1795 , 146 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000) (holding that the version of 18 U.S.C. § 3583 (e) in effect before 1994 allowed a sentencing court to impose both a term of imprisonment and a term of supervised *846 release upon…