United States v. Phillips

202 F. App'x 821
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Phillips. Read the opinion of the Court — 477 F.3d 215
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 24, 2006·No. 04-10606·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Matthew William Phillips appeals the sentence imposed following the revocation *822 of his supervised release after his conviction for accessory after the fact to possession of stolen firearms. This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction on its own motion if necessary. Mosley v. Cozby, 813 F.2d 659, 660 (5th Cir.1987). Article III, § 2, of the Constitution limits federal court jurisdiction to actual cases and controversies. See Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998). The case-or-controversy requirement demands that “some concrete and continuing injury other than the now-ended incarceration or parole — some ‘collateral consequence’ of the conviction — must exist if the suit is to be maintained.” Id.

Phillips has served the sentence that was imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. The order revoking Phillips’s supervised release imposed no further term of supervised release. Accordingly, there is no case or controversy for this court to address, and the appeal is dismissed as moot.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

United States v. Phillips, 202 F. App'x 821 (5th Cir. 2006).

202 F. App'x 821 (United States v. Phillips) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Spencer v. Kemna
523 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Marion Ray Mosley v. Officer M.D. Cozby
813 F.2d 659 (Fifth Circuit, 1987)