United States v. Regina Bird
706 F. App'x 136
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Regina Dawn Bird admitted supervised-release violations; district court revoked release, sentenced her to 7 months’ imprisonment plus 24 months’ supervised release.
- Bird appealed; appointed counsel filed an Anders brief asserting no meritorious issues but questioned whether the revocation sentence was plainly unreasonable (arguing for longer prison term and no additional supervised release).
- Bird was notified of right to file pro se supplemental brief but did not do so.
- While the appeal was pending Bird completed the 7-month imprisonment and began serving the 24-month supervised-release term.
- The Fourth Circuit considered mootness of the prison-term challenge and retained jurisdiction over the supervised-release challenge.
- The court reviewed procedural and substantive reasonableness standards for revocation sentences and affirmed the supervised-release term as within statutory limits and not unreasonable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mootness of challenge to 7-month imprisonment | Bird argued the prison term was plainly unreasonable | Government argued sentence was proper; court must consider mootness | Challenge to imprisonment is moot because Bird already served the term — dismissed in part |
| Reasonableness of 24-month supervised-release term | Bird (via counsel) suggested a different allocation — longer prison term with no supervised release | Government supported revocation sentence; court relied on §3553(a) and Guidelines Chapter 7 factors | Court affirmed: 24-month supervised release is below statutory maximum, district court provided adequate explanation, sentence not plainly unreasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (appointment of counsel and procedures when counsel finds appeal frivolous)
- Castendet-Lewis v. Sessions, 855 F.3d 253 (mootness and Article III jurisdiction considerations)
- United States v. Hardy, 545 F.3d 280 (mootness of challenge to imprisonment already served)
- United States v. Webb, 738 F.3d 638 (standards for reviewing procedural and substantive reasonableness of revocation sentences)
- United States v. Maxwell, 285 F.3d 336 (statutory maximums applicable to supervised-release revocation sentences)