Court Opinion

ID: 4688602
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-05-20 16:00:29.865793+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:12:52.576547
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 20-1251
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                                      Plaintiff - Appellee

                                         v.

                                  Jerry N. Brown

                                    Defendant - Appellant
                                  ____________

                      Appeal from United States District Court
                 for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: April 12, 2021
                              Filed: May 20, 2021
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before LOKEN, WOLLMAN, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Jerry Brown filed this appeal to challenge a condition of supervised release.
While the appeal was pending, however, he violated other conditions and received
prison time. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). With no new term of supervised release
imposed by the district court,1 nor any reason to expect that he will be subject to the
challenged condition again, we dismiss the appeal as moot.2 See United States v.
Wynn, 553 F.3d 1114, 1119 (8th Cir. 2009).
                       ______________________________

      1
      The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the
Western District of Missouri.
      2
        We note that the government’s use of a letter filed under Federal Rule of
Appellate Procedure 28(j) to raise mootness “was procedurally irregular.” McGehee
v. Neb. Dep’t of Corr. Servs., 987 F.3d 785, 787 (8th Cir. 2021). The proper vehicle
would have been a motion to dismiss the appeal. Compare Fed. R. App. P. 27(a)(1)
(“An application for an order or other relief is made by motion . . . .”), with Fed. R.
App. P. 28(j) (allowing the use of a letter to cite “pertinent and significant authorities
[that] come to a party’s attention after the party’s brief has been filed”).
                                           -2-