United States v. Adeyinka
This text of 268 F. App'x 312 (United States v. Adeyinka) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Adekunle Olyumuyiwa Adeyinka raises arguments that he concedes are foreclosed by United States v. Marmolejo, 915 F.2d 981, 988 (5th Cir.1990), which explained that double jeopardy does not apply in supervised release revocation proceedings, and United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 119 (5th Cir.2005), which held that a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial to determine whether the terms of supervised release have been violated. The Government’s motion for summary af-firmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
268 F. App'x 312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-adeyinka-ca5-2008.