Court Opinion

ID: 9396889
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-23 21:00:41.654488+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:19.978215
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4667      Doc: 24         Filed: 05/22/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-4667

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        AARON MICHAEL DOHOGN,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:15-cr-00121-LCB-1)

        Submitted: May 18, 2023                                           Decided: May 22, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, John A. Dusenbury, Jr., Assistant
        Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER,
        Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra J. Hairston, United States Attorney,
        Laura J. Dildine, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
        ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4667      Doc: 24         Filed: 05/22/2023     Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               In 2015, Aaron Michael Dohogn pleaded guilty to possession of machine guns, in

        violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), and the district court sentenced him to 52 months’

        imprisonment, followed by three years’ supervised release. In 2020, the district court

        revoked Dohogn’s supervised release and sentenced him to eight months’ imprisonment

        followed by a further two-year term of supervised release. The court then again revoked

        Dohogn’s supervised release, sentencing him in November 2022 to 14 months’

        imprisonment with no term of supervised release to follow. Dohogn seeks to appeal this

        last revocation judgment. While this appeal was pending, Dohogn was released from

        custody.

               “When a case or controversy ceases to exist—either due to a change in the facts or

        the law—the litigation is moot, and [our] subject matter jurisdiction ceases to exist also.”

        Porter v. Clarke, 852 F.3d 358, 363 (4th Cir. 2017) (internal quotation marks omitted).

        “Because mootness is jurisdictional, we can and must consider it even if neither party has

        raised it.” United States v. Ketter, 908 F.3d 61, 65 (4th Cir. 2018). Dohogn has already

        served his sentence and faces no additional term of supervised release; thus, there is no

        longer a live controversy. Dohogn’s challenge to the sentence imposed upon the most

        recent revocation of his supervised release is therefore moot. See United States v. Hardy,

        545 F.3d 280, 283-84 (4th Cir. 2008).

                                                     2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4667      Doc: 24        Filed: 05/22/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

              Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral

        argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

        before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                     DISMISSED

                                                    3