United States v. Timothy King , 410 F. App'x 758 ( 2011 )

Case: 10-10668 Document: 00511341957 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/06/2011
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
January 6, 2011
No. 10-10668 Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
TIMOTHY JAY KING,
Defendant - Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:05-CR-59
Before KING, STEWART, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The issue raised in this case is whether Defendant-Appellant Timothy
King was sentenced to a term of revocation imprisonment in excess of the
amount authorized by 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). The district court sentenced King
to 24 months’ imprisonment upon revoking his second term of supervised
release. King argues that his sentence exceeded the amount of revocation
imprisonment authorized by § 3583(e)(3) because that subsection caps the
aggregate amount of revocation imprisonment for his offense at the amount of
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .
R. 47.5.4.
Case: 10-10668 Document: 00511341957 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/06/2011
No. 10-10668
supervised release authorized by § 3583(b) for the same offense, which is three
years for his Class D felony. He argues that, because he had already served 24
months’ imprisonment on a prior revocation of his supervised release, the
district court could not sentence him to more than 12 months’ imprisonment
when it revoked his supervised release in this instance.
We addressed this precise issue in United States v. Hampton, No. 10-10035
(5th Cir. Jan. 6, 2011), which we have decided today. In Hampton, we held that
the amount of supervised release authorized for an offense by § 3583(b) does not
cap the aggregate amount of revocation imprisonment authorized by § 3583(e)(3)
for the same offense. Id., slip op. at 6. When King violated the terms of his
second supervised release, § 3583(e)(3) authorized the district court to sentence
him to a maximum of two years’ imprisonment as a revocation sentence, without
reference to the amount of revocation imprisonment he had previously served.
See id. Accordingly, the district court’s judgment revoking King’s supervised
release and sentencing him to 24 months’ imprisonment is AFFIRMED.
2