United States v. Cordero

271 F. App'x 336
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMarch 31, 2008
Docket07-4799
StatusUnpublished

This text of 271 F. App'x 336 (United States v. Cordero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Cordero, 271 F. App'x 336 (4th Cir. 2008).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

John Cordero appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to a six-month term of imprisonment. On appeal, Cordero contends that the district court erred by revoking his supervised release because the government failed to prove that he knowingly used cocaine. We affirm.

Under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3583(g)(1) (West Supp.2007), revocation of supervised release is mandatory if the defendant possessed a controlled substance in violation of the terms of his supervised release. Proof that a defendant intentionally used a controlled substance is sufficient to establish possession of that substance within the meaning of § 3583(g). United States v. Battle, 993 F.2d 49, 50 (4th Cir.1993); see United States v. Clark, 30 F.3d 23, 26 (4th Cir.1994). A district court need only find a violation of a condition of supervised release by a preponderance of the evidence. 18 U.S.C.A. § 3583(e)(3) (West 2000 & Supp.2007); Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694, 700, 120 S.Ct. 1795, 146 L.Ed.2d 727 (2000). We have reviewed the record with these standards in mind and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Cordero’s supervised release. See United States v. Pregent, 190 F.3d 279, 282 (4th Cir.1999) (stating standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Johnson v. United States
529 U.S. 694 (Supreme Court, 2000)
United States v. Deloris Battle
993 F.2d 49 (Fourth Circuit, 1993)
United States v. Richard Rene Clark
30 F.3d 23 (Fourth Circuit, 1994)
United States v. George Lloyd Pregent
190 F.3d 279 (Fourth Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
271 F. App'x 336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-cordero-ca4-2008.