United States v. Joanna Espinoza Reyna
This text of 653 F. App'x 251 (United States v. Joanna Espinoza Reyna) 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, Joanna Espinoza Reyna raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Shabazz, 633 F.3d 342, 345-46 (5th Cir. 2011), which held that the phrase “on any such revocation” in 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) does not impose an aggregate limit on imprisonment for revocation of supervised release but limits only the amount of imprisonment that may be imposed each time a court revokes a defendant’s supervised release. Accordingly, the motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the alternative motion for an extension of time to file a bi'ief is DENIED, 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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
653 F. App'x 251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-joanna-espinoza-reyna-ca5-2016.