Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Page: 1 of 8
[PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
__________________________
No. 14-14993
__________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:08-cr-00024-LGW-RSB-1
The Honorable Donald M. Middlebrooks, United States District Judge for the Southern District
of Florida, sitting by designation.
Case: 14-14993
Page: 2 of 8
Case: 14-14993
Page: 3 of 8
Case: 14-14993
Page: 4 of 8
Case: 14-14993
Page: 5 of 8
Section 3583(h) was added to the statute in 1994, and explicitly gave district courts the power
to impose another term of supervised release following imprisonment. Several circuits had
previously held that 3583(e)(3) did not authorize a district court to impose a new term of
supervised release following revocation and reimprisonment. See Johnson v. United States, 529
U.S. 694, 120 S. Ct. 1795, 146 L. Ed. 2d 727 (2000).
5
Case: 14-14993
Page: 6 of 8
18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(3) (Supp. V 1993). Revocation was therefore limited by, and
could not exceed, the term of supervised release imposed by the original
sentencing court.
In 1994, the statute was amended to allow a district court to
revoke a term of supervised release, and require the defendant to serve
in prison all or part of the term of supervised release authorized by
statute for the offense that resulted in such term of supervised release
....
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-322
110505(3), 108 Stat. 1796, 2016-17 (1994) (amendment italicized). Under this
version, revocation was no longer limited by the original sentence, but instead by
statutory caps. See United States v. Williams, 425 F.3d 987 (11th Cir. 2005),
abrogated on other grounds. However, a number of circuits, including the
Eleventh, subsequently held that the revocation statutory caps were cumulative
limits that allowed credit for time served in previous violations of supervised
release. Id.
In 2003, Congress amended 3583(e)(3) to expressly provide that the
statutory caps now apply to each revocation of supervised release. The PROTECT
Act added the phrase on any such revocation so that it now provides a
defendant whose term is revoked under this paragraph may not be required to serve
on any such revocation more than . . . 2 years if such offense is a class C or D
6
Case: 14-14993
Page: 7 of 8
Case: 14-14993
Page: 8 of 8
IV. Conclusion
We affirm the judgment of the district court revoking Cunninghams
Supervised Release and sentencing him to 24 months imprisonment.
AFFIRMED.