Court Opinion

ID: 9930399
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 20:01:09.62284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:15:33.930156
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-13457    Document: 37-1     Date Filed: 02/06/2024   Page: 1 of 2

                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                          ____________________

                                No. 22-13457
                          ____________________

       UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
                                                      Plaintiﬀ-Appellee,
       versus
       HELMER ROBERTO JARAMILLO, JR.,

                                                  Defendant-Appellant.

                          ____________________

                 Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Middle District of Florida
                 D.C. Docket No. 8:18-cr-00226-WFJ-TGW-1
                          ____________________
USCA11 Case: 22-13457       Document: 37-1      Date Filed: 02/06/2024      Page: 2 of 2

       2                       Opinion of the Court                   22-13457

       Before NEWSOM, GRANT, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
               Helmer Jaramillo, Jr. appeals his 24-month imprisonment
       sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release, chal-
       lenging the procedural and substantive reasonableness of his sen-
       tence. However, Jaramillo was released from custody on January
       18, 2024, and is not presently serving an additional term of super-
       vised release. Therefore, because Jaramillo’s federal sentence has
       been discharged and no continuing collateral consequences of his
       sentence can be demonstrated, his appeal no longer presents a live
       controversy that would “likely . . . be redressed by a favorable judi-
       cial decision.” Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-16 (1998) (quotation
       marks omitted) (holding that a court will not presume collateral
       consequences exist where a judgment revokes parole and noting
       that assertions that a parole violation could be used in determining
       future eligibility for parole or could be used to increase future crim-
       inal sentences were not sufficient showings to overcome moot-
       ness); United States v. Juvenile Male, 564 U.S. 932, 936-39 (2011) (hold-
       ing that the Ninth Circuit lacked jurisdiction to consider the case
       on the merits where, at the time of its decision, the defendant’s ju-
       venile suspension had expired, he was no longer required to regis-
       ter as a sex offender, and no other mootness exception applied).
              Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, as moot.
       No petition for rehearing may be ﬁled unless it complies with the
       timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other
       applicable rules.