Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cederick HICKS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-07-01
Citations: 328 F. App'x 446
Docket Number: No. 08-10434
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cederick HICKS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 328
Pages: 446–447

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cederick HICKS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-10434.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted June 16, 2009.
Filed July 1, 2009.
U.S. Attorney, Esquire, Timothy S. Vasquez, Esquire, Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Richard F. Boulware, Esquire, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: PAEZ, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Cederick Hicks appeals from the amended judgment revoking his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate and remand.
Hicks contends that the district court lacked jurisdiction to amend the judgment and to continue his supervised release. Upon review of the record, we are unable to determine whether the district court intended to revoke supervised release and impose a new, 36-month term. We therefore vacate the judgment and remand for the district court to clarify its intent. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(2), (e)(3).
VACATED and REMANDED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.