Court Opinion

ID: 9965068
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-05-01 17:01:35.089924+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:24:41.387101
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                           FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        MAY 1 2024
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                           FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                       No. 23-287
                                                D.C. No. 9:22-cr-00018-DLC-1
             Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.
                                                MEMORANDUM*
THERESA ANNE CHABOT,

             Defendant - Appellant.

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                            for the District of Montana
                   Dana L. Christensen, District Judge, Presiding

                            Submitted April 22, 2024**

Before:      CALLAHAN, LEE, and FORREST, Circuit Judges.

      Theresa Anne Chabot appeals the inclusion of the standard conditions of

supervised release in the written judgment, which the court entered following her

guilty-plea conviction for conducting an unlicensed money transmitting business,

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1960. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
We vacate the standard conditions and remand with instructions.

      Chabot contends that the district court erred under United States v. Montoya,

82 F.4th 640 (9th Cir. 2023) (en banc), because it did not orally impose, or provide

her a list of, the standard conditions of supervised release prior to judgment.

Although Chabot waived her right to appeal her sentence, the government does not

seek to enforce the waiver. See United States v. Jacobo Castillo, 496 F.3d 947,

957 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) (appeal waivers are non-jurisdictional and

forfeitable). Instead, it concedes that the district court erred and concurs with

Chabot that remand is appropriate. Accordingly, we vacate the standard

supervised release conditions included in the written judgment and remand for the

limited purpose of permitting the district court to orally pronounce any standard

conditions it wishes to impose and after giving Chabot an opportunity to object.

See Montoya, 82 F.4th at 656.

      VACATED IN PART and REMANDED.

                                         2                                    23-287