T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J UA N MAG AN A- C OL I N, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 50333 D . C . N o. 3: 03 -C R -008 56 -G T -1 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e S o u th e rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia G or don T hom ps on, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d D e c e m be r10, 2009

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: R E IN H A R D T , T R O T T an dW A R D L A W , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J u a n M a g a n a - C o lin ap p e a ls f r o m th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s ju d g m e n t r e v o k in g h is s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e a nd s e nt e nc i ng hi m t o 12 m onths i m pr i s onm e nt . W e ha ve ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e a f f irm . 

# FI LED DE C 21 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSI n hi s ope ni ng br i e f , M a ga na - C ol i n a r gue d tha tthi s de l a ya l s o de pr i ve d the 1 d is tr ic t c o u rt o f

ju r is d ic tio n to r e v o k e h is s u p e rv is e dr e le a s e u n d e r1 8 U .S .C . § 3583( i ) . H ow e ve r , he ha s c onc e de d i n hi s r e pl ybr i e f tha tthe r e w a s no vi ol a t i on of § 3583( i ) i n hi s c a s e . S e c t i on 3583( i ) l i m i t s the t i m e i n w hi c h ac ourtm a yr e voke supervi se d rel ea se a

f ter the t erm of supervi se d rel ea se has e xp i re d. M agana’ s t erm o f su p erv i sed rel ease h ad n o tyetex p i red w h en h i s rev o cat i o n h eari n g w as h el d , so § 3 5 8 3 ( i) d o e s n o t ap p ly .

- 2- M agana-Co l i n argues thatthe three -y ear del aybetw ee n the i ss uance of a w a rr a ntf orhi s a rr e s tf

orvi ol a t i on of

s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e a nd the c om m e nc e m e ntof hi s s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e r e voc a t i on he a r i ng w a s unr e a s onabl e , i n vi ol a t i on of D ue P r o c e s s a n d F e d e r a l R u le o f C r im in a l P r o c e d u r e 3 2 .1 . H e d o e s n o t c o n te s t th a t h is 1 r e v o c a tio n h e a r in g w a s h e ldw ith in ar e a s o n ab le tim e a f te rh e w a s ta k e n in to c us t odyf orhi s s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e vi ol a t i on. H ow e ve r , he a r gue s tha tthe r e a s onabl e t i m e f

orhi s he a r i ng s houl d be m e a s ur e d f r om the da t e tha tthe w a rr a nt f o rh is v io la tio n is s u e d . R u le 3 2 .1 f

o rm a liz e s th e r e q u ir e m e n ts o f th e D u e P r o c e s s C lau s e . See U ni te d State s v . Santana , 5 2 6 F .3 d1 2 5 7 , 1 2 5 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) ; s e e a ls o id. a t1259 n. 2 (“ W e tre atproceedi ng s f or re vo ca t i on of prob at i on , parol e, and sup ervi se d r e l e a s e a s e qui va l e nt s f

ordue pr oc e s s purpos e s . . . . ” ) . A s am a tt e rof D ue P ro cess, M ag an a-C o l i n ’ s arg u m en ti s cl earl y fo recl o sed b y Mo o d yv . D a g g e tt , 429 U . S . 78, 87 ( 1976) (i dent i fy i ng cust od y und era par ol e vi ol at i on w arrant , ra ther tha n i s s ua nc e of

the w a rr a nt , a s “ the ope r a t i ve e ve nt ” tha ttr i gge r s the r e qui r e m e nt- 3-

of a t i m el y heari ng ). F urther, the pl ai n l angu age of R ul e 32. 1 sho w s thati tappl i es on l y once asupervi se d rel ea se vi ol at or i s i n cust od y f or the vi ol at i on . T here fore , w e c on cl ud e thatthe del aythatM agana-Co l i n chal l enges di d n otvi ol at e e i ther R u le 3 2 .1 o r th e D u e P ro ce ss C lau se an dw e A F F IR M th e d istrict co u rt’s r e v o c a tio n o f

h is s u p e rv is e d r e le a s e . AF F I R ME D.