United States v. Pocklington, No. 13-50461
(McKeown with Kleinfeld and M. Smith) --- The Ninth Circuit held that a
district court lacks jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3565(c) to retroactively
revoke probation after the probation term expires if a warrant or summons is
not issued during the probation term, and thus reversed a revocation of
probation entered 11 months after the term expired.
The defendant was
serving a two-year probation term for bankruptcy fraud. One of his creditors notified the probation
office that he had undisclosed assets.
Probation in turn notified the district court about the letter, but saw
no violation. The district court saw
things differently, and directed the probation office to investigate. A week before the probation term expired, the
district court issued an "order to show cause," which led to a
hearing on whether the probation term should be extended. That hearing was held five days after the
probation term expired. Ultimately the
probation office's investigation revealed that the defendant had not truthfully
disclosed all of his assets, and 11 months after the probation term expired,
the district court revoked it and sentenced the defendant to six months in
prison followed by two years of supervised release. The defendant did not object to the district
court's actions on jurisdictional grounds.
Nevertheless, because
subject-matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time, the court of appeals was
obligated to address it. The relevant
statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3565(c), says that the "power of the court to revoke
a sentence of probation" can be extended after the term otherwise expires
only if a "warrant or summons" is issued during the probation
term. This couldn't be any clearer about
the district court's subject-matter jurisdiction. Nor was there any "warrant or
summons" filed within the probation term.
The probation office was clear that there wasn't probable cause to issue
a warrant, and its request that the court extend the probation term wasn't the
same thing as a judge issuing a warrant or summons. The court thus reversed the revocation and
resulting sentence.
The decision is here:
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home