United States v. Medhi Ilkhani

MEMORANDUM

Defendant-Appellant Medhi Ilkhani appeals the district court’s order revoking and reimposing a term of supervised re lease, which expired May 13, 2012. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we repeat only those facts necessary to resolve the issues raised on appeal. This appeal is now moot. Therefore, we lack jurisdiction and dismiss.

A case becomes moot when it no longer satisfies the case-or-controversy requirement of Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, which demands that “the plaintiff ‘must have suffered, or be threatened with, an actual injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable judicial decision.’ ” Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7 , 118 S.Ct. 978 , 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998) (quoting Lewis v. Continental Bank Corp., 494 U.S. 472, 477 , 110 S.Ct. 1249 , 108 L.Ed.2d 400 (1990)). In criminal appeals, “[a]n incarcerated convict’s (or parolee’s) challenge to the validity of his conviction always satisfies the case-or-controversy requirement because the incarceration (or the restriction imposed by the terms of parole) constitutes a concrete injury, caused by the conviction and…