676 F.3d 1138
8th Cir.2012Background
- Brown, after second revocation, received 90 days imprisonment followed by 57 months supervised release; prior revocation granted 60 months supervised release; district court’s 90-day imprisonment plus 60-month release was challenged on maximum length; Brown argued §3583(b) capped supervised release at five years; LeMay held that §3583(b)’s cap is overridden by statutes authorizing longer releases; Brown convicted under 21 U.S.C. §841 with §841(b)(1)(A) requiring at least five years of supervised release; Brown’s second revocation sentence was imposed after release from the first revocation; district court later imposed another 90 days then 57 months supervised release; Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does extending supervised release beyond five years violate §3583(b)? | Brown contends §3583(b) caps at five years. | U.S. argues LeMay controls, authorizing longer terms due to §841. | No plain error; LeMay controls, §841 overrides §3583(b). |
| Proper deduction of time served from supervised release when multiple revocations occur? | Brown argues both 90-day terms should reduce the release term. | Law of the case limits deduction to the second 90-day term. | District court properly deducted only the second 90-day term; law of the case governs first term. |
| Whether LeMay governs despite Hernandez conflict? | Brown urges Hernandez should control. | LeMay controls; Hernandez not binding when in conflict. | LeMay controls; no divergence warranting Hernandez. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. LeMay, 952 F.2d 995 (8th Cir.1991) (§3583(b) overridden by statute authorizing longer terms of supervised release)
- United States v. Hernandez, 436 F.3d 851 (8th Cir.2006) (case potentially conflicting with LeMay (not controlling))
- Johnson v. United States, 529 U.S. 694 (2000) (plain-error standard for sentencing variances)
- United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475 (8th Cir.2010) (plain-error review framework)
- United States v. Wisecarver, 644 F.3d 764 (8th Cir.2011) (law-of-the-case doctrine on remand)
- United States v. Castellanos, 608 F.3d 1010 (8th Cir.2010) (law-of-the-case implications on remand)