2004 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

5-25-2004 

# U S A v . M a r r e r o P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 03-3753

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2004 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min . C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du
. Re c omme nde d C it at ion

" U SA v . M a r r e r o " (2004). 2004 D e cisio n s . P ape r 682. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2004/682NOT PRECEDE NTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE TH IRD CIR CU IT


### No. 03-3753

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. ANTHONY MARRERO, Appellant

APPEAL FROM THE DI STRI CT COURT OF THE VIR GIN I SLANDS D.C. C rim. No. 91 -cr-00014 -3 Distri ct Judge: The Honorable Raymond L. Fi nch, Chief J udge

Argued: May 7, 2004

Be for e: B AR RY , AM BR O, and SM ITH , Circuit Judges (Opinion Fi led: May 25, 2004)

Stephen A. Brusch, Esq. (Argued) Suite 2G Internationa l Plaza P.O. Box 988 Charlotte Amalie, St . Thomas USVI, 00804 Attorneyfor Appella nt1 Appellant also ar gued that

assuming hi s term of supervis ed rele ase had expi red, t he delay cau sed b y the gov ernm ent in h olding his rev ocatio n hea ring w as no t reaso nably nec essa ry. 2 Tracey Christ opher, Esq. (Argued) St. Cla ir Theodore , Esq. Office of the United State s Attorne y 1108 King Street , Suite 201 Ch ristiansted , St. Cro ix USVI, 00820 Attorneyfor Appelle e

OPI NION

BA RR Y, Circuit

Judge By order entere d August 22, 2003, the Dist rict Court revoked t

he term of supervi sed rel ease appel lant Anthony Marrero was then s erving and s entenced hi m to a term of i mprisonment of twenty- four months. In thi s appeal, appell ant argue d that t he Dis tric t Co ur t l ack ed p ower to re vok e hi s t er m of s upe rv is ed r el eas e be cau se , a t t he time of revocation, t

hat te rm had expire d. 1 Because we were unable t o determi ne from the r ecord and the brief s of the parties whether supervised r elease had expire d and, i f so, when, c ounsel were di recte d to provi de at oralargument “t

he dates, if any , from Februar y 5, 1999 to August 19, 2003 during wh ich M arrero wa s incar cerate d and wh ether s uch p eriod o r perio ds of incarc eration , ifany, were ‘in con nection w ith a conviction f or a Fed eral, State or local crime.’ See 18

U.S.C. § 3624(e ).” At oral ar gument, appel lant’ s counsel advised t he Court, and counsel f or the United States did not

disput e, that appel lant ha d been incar cerat ed “in connect ion with a Federal, State or

local offense” from May 12, 2001 t o August 19, 2003, the dat e of the revocation heari ng. It

was, ther efore, apparent that t he three year

term of supervised relea se which had been i mposed on February5, 1999 had not expired when that te rm was revoked becaus e incar ceration tol ls a period of supervised r elease . The order of the Dis trict C our t, ente red on A ugu st 22 , 200 3, w ill, the refo re, b e af firm ed.