Case ID: f-appx_163/html/0579-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Timothy Paul DANIELSON, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 03-30238.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Jan. 9, 2006.
    
    Decided Jan. 18, 2006.
    Annette L. Hayes, Esq., Seattle, WA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Jordan Gross, Esq., Yarmuth Wilsdon Calfo, PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: HUG, O’SCANNLAIN and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Timothy Paul Danielson appeals the district court’s order revoking supervised release and imposing sentence.

We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See United States v. Palomba, 182 F.3d 1121, 1123 (9th Cir.1999) (stating that a defendant lacks standing to challenge a completed sentence); see also Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 14, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998) (holding that revocation of parole does not create collateral consequences sufficient to extend standing beyond expiration of sentence and rejecting as moot a challenge to an allegedly erroneous parole revocation).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED. The appeal is DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.