United States v. Ivander James, Jr.
692 F. App'x 718
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Appellant Ivander James, Jr. was resentenced for conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm).
- At resentencing the district court imposed time served and a three‑year term of supervised release.
- James, through counsel, filed an Anders brief questioning whether the three‑year supervised‑release term was substantively unreasonable; no pro se brief was filed.
- The Government declined to file a brief on appeal.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed the sentence for abuse of discretion and affirmed the amended judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a three‑year supervised‑release term was substantively unreasonable | James argued the three‑year term was excessive given his lengthy incarceration and should be reduced | Government and district court argued supervised release is discretionary and serves rehabilitative/supervisory purposes distinct from imprisonment | Court held the district court did not abuse its discretion and the three‑year term is presumptively reasonable and justified by need for supervised transition |
| Whether supervised release may be offset by time served/should run concurrently with imprisonment | James implicitly relied on equity from over‑incarceration to reduce supervised release | Court reaffirmed that supervised release serves different objectives and cannot be reduced because of excess time served | Court held supervised release is not reduced or run concurrently to compensate for time served; defendant may seek early termination later |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Strieper, 666 F.3d 288 (4th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for legal questions on supervised release)
- United States v. Johnson, 529 U.S. 53 (2000) (supervised release term not reduced by excess time served in prison)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (sentence review standard and abuse‑of‑discretion framework)
- United States v. Neuhauser, 745 F.3d 125 (4th Cir. 2014) (supervised‑release tolling and distinct purpose of supervised release)
- United States v. Buchanan, 638 F.3d 448 (4th Cir. 2011) (supervised release tolling while defendant absconded)
- United States v. Evans, 159 F.3d 908 (4th Cir. 1998) (supervised release is part of the sentence)
- United States v. Carter, 564 F.3d 325 (4th Cir. 2009) (substantive‑reasonableness review under abuse‑of‑discretion standard)