United States v. Van Dyke

81 F. App'x 857
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedNovember 18, 2003
DocketNo. 03-2259
StatusPublished

This text of 81 F. App'x 857 (United States v. Van Dyke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh 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. Van Dyke, 81 F. App'x 857 (7th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

[858]*858ORDER

Mark Van Dyke was sentenced to 46 months’ imprisonment and three years’ supervised release for conspiracy to commit mail fraud and bank fraud. He was released from prison, but violated the terms of his supervised release and in April 2003 was sentenced to an additional six months’ imprisonment but no further supervised release. Van Dyke appeals only the revocation of his supervised release, and his appointed counsel now moves to withdraw because Van Dyke has since been released from prison.

When a prisoner is released from incarceration, any challenge to the validity of his conviction becomes moot unless he continues to suffer collateral consequences because of the conviction. Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998). Any collateral consequences that Van Dyke now suffers result from his original conviction, not the revocation of his supervised release. His appeal is moot because he can gain nothing from it. See United States v. Trotter, 270 F.3d 1150, 1153 (7th Cir.2001).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the appeal is DISMISSED.

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

Related

Spencer v. Kemna
523 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1998)
United States v. Clarence Trotter
270 F.3d 1150 (Seventh Circuit, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
81 F. App'x 857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-van-dyke-ca7-2003.