Court Opinion

ID: 9951153
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-03-15 18:01:20.837512+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:37:43.651612
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-10907           Document: 38-1         Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/15/2024

          United States Court of Appeals
               for the Fifth Circuit
                                  ____________
                                                                            United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                     Fifth Circuit
                                   No. 23-10907
                                 Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                 ____________                                March 15, 2024
                                                                              Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                   Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                         versus

Brent Anderson,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                           USDC No. 4:18-CR-247-1
                  ______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
      Brent Anderson appeals the district court’s judgment revoking his
supervised release and sentencing him to an eight-month term of
imprisonment.       Anderson challenges the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C.
§ 3583(g), which mandates revocation of supervised release and a term of
imprisonment for any offender who violates certain conditions of supervised

      _____________________
      *
          This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-10907        Document: 38-1        Page: 2     Date Filed: 03/15/2024

                                  No. 23-10907

release, including possessing a controlled substance and having three positive
drug tests over the course of one year. See § 3583(g)(1) & (4).
       Relying on United States v. Haymond, 139 S. Ct. 2369 (2019),
Anderson contends that § 3583(g) is unconstitutional because it requires
revocation of a term of supervised release and imposition of a term of
imprisonment without affording the defendant the constitutionally
guaranteed right to a jury trial and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. He
concedes that his challenge is foreclosed under United States v. Garner, 969
F.3d 550 (5th Cir. 2020), and he raises the issue to preserve it for further
review. The Government has filed an unopposed motion for summary
affirmance and, alternatively, for an extension of time to file its brief.
       As Anderson concedes, in Garner, we rejected the argument that
Anderson has advanced and held that § 3583(g) is not unconstitutional under
Haymond. See Garner, 969 F.3d at 551-53. Thus, Anderson’s sole argument
on appeal is foreclosed, and summary affirmance is appropriate.              See
Groendyke Transp., Inc. v. Davis, 406 F.2d 1158, 1162-63 (5th Cir. 1969).
Accordingly, the Government’s motion for summary affirmance is
GRANTED, its alternative motion for extension of time is DENIED, and
the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

                                        2