Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-24-50341/USCOURTS-ca5-24-50341-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kody Robert Evans
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 24-50341

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Kody Robert Evans, 

Defendant—Appellant.

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:23-CR-453-1

______________________________

Before King, Southwick, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Kody Robert Evans pleaded guilty to highspeed flight from an 

immigration checkpoint in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 758, and the district court 

sentenced him to 60 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised 

release. For the first time on appeal, Evans challenges a condition of 

supervised release providing that if his probation officer determines that he 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 15, 2025

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 24-50341 Document: 47-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/15/2025
No. 24-50341

2

poses a risk to another person, the officer may require him to notify that 

person of the risk. Evans contends that this condition improperly delegates 

judicial authority to the probation officer. 

As Evans correctly concedes, this issue is foreclosed by United States 

v. Mejia-Banegas, 32 F.4th 450, 452 (5th Cir. 2022). He raises the issue to 

preserve it for further review. The Government has filed an unopposed 

motion for summary affirmance and, alternatively, for an extension of time 

to file a merits brief. 

Because summary disposition is appropriate, see Groendyke Transp., 

Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162 (5th Cir. 1969), the Government’s motion 

for summary affirmance is GRANTED, the Government’s alternative 

motion for an extension of time to file a brief is DENIED, and the district 

court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Case: 24-50341 Document: 47-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/15/2025