United States v. Magnan, 700 F. App'x 838

In Jan 2000 David Magnan (a Native American) pleaded guilty in federal court to arson and simple assault and was sentenced to 25 months and five years’ supervised release.
On Mar 2, 2004 Magnan was arrested in Oklahoma for three murders and an attempted murder; state prosecutors initially tried and (mistakenly) convicted him under state law and sentenced him to death; those convictions were later vacated for lack of state subject-matter jurisdiction.
In July 2013 the federal government charged Magnan with three counts of murder in Indian Country under 18 U.S.C. § 1153; he was convicted by a jury in Oct 2015 and sentenced to three consecutive life sentences in May 2016 (affirmed on appeal).
The government filed an amended federal petition to revoke Magnan’s supervised release on Apr 22, 2014; after his federal murder convictions and sentencing, the district court held a revocation hearing and found by a preponderance that he had violated supervised release.
The district court imposed a 36-month revocation term to run consecutive to the three life sentences; Magnan appealed the supervised-release revocation.
The appointed appellate counsel submitted an Anders brief and moved to withdraw, identifying only a potential due-process/delay argument; the Tenth Circuit found no reversible issue and dismissed the appeal, granting counsel’s motion to withdraw as to the supervised-release appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 12-year delay in adjudicating the supervised-release petition violated due process	Gov: Delay did not affect Magnan’s present liberty because he is confined for independent murder convictions	Magnan: Delay denied due-process protection of his conditional liberty interest in supervised release	Court: Delay did not deprive Magnan of due process because his continuous confinement derives from separate murder convictions, so delay had no present or inevitable effect on his liberty interest

Moody v. Daggett, 429 U.S. 78 (Due process protects statutory conditional freedom of parolees; delay analysis where confinement results from independent charges)
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (Standards for appellate counsel to move to withdraw when appeal is frivolous)
Magnan v. Trammell, 719 F.3d 1159 (10th Cir. 2013) (vacating Magnan’s state convictions for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction)
Hough v. Alderden, [citation="236 F. App'x 350"] (10th Cir. 2007) (when defendant is in custody for an independent crime, he is not entitled to due-process protections for supervised-release revocation while that separate confinement continues)