Unreasonable Supervised Release Condition for SORNA Offender Vacated
United
States v. Salazar, No. 12-50695 (5th Cir. Feb.
24, 2014) (Higginbotham, Clement, Prado)
As to the merits, the panel agrees with Salazar that the challenged condition is not reasonably related to the statutory supervised release factors since there is no indication that sexually-stimulating or sexually-oriented materials contributed either to his sexual abuse or SORNA offense. The panel vacates and remands for the district court to either remove the condition or attempt to explain its applicability. The panel does not reach Salazar’s argument that the condition was overbroad and violates his First Amendment rights.
So, keep on objecting to unreasonable terms of supervised release. You might just end up getting them vacated!
Salazar violated the terms of his supervised release
for a suspended sentence for his conviction of third-degree sexual abuse when
he failed to register as a sex offender, and he was sentenced to a prison term
and an additional period of supervised release with numerous special
conditions. The panel holds that “the
district court abused its discretion by imposing the challenged condition”—to
refrain from purchasing, possessing, or using any sexually stimulating or sexually
oriented materials—“on Salazar without demonstrating that it is reasonably
related to the statutory factors.”
At the sentencing, the district court added new
conditions to Salazar’s supervised release.
The defense counsel objected to the new conditions because “they’re
overly burdensome and . . . .” Before
the defense counsel could finish her sentence, the court overruled the
objection. Again, defense counsel
attempted to elaborate on her objection, and the court cut her off with another
“Overruled.” The panel holds that
Salazar properly preserved his objection and applies abuse of discretion review
because Salazar’s attempts to object with specificity “were futile because the
court failed to give his counsel a reasonable opportunity to explain her
objections or ask for the rationale behind the court’s refusal to sustain
them.”As to the merits, the panel agrees with Salazar that the challenged condition is not reasonably related to the statutory supervised release factors since there is no indication that sexually-stimulating or sexually-oriented materials contributed either to his sexual abuse or SORNA offense. The panel vacates and remands for the district court to either remove the condition or attempt to explain its applicability. The panel does not reach Salazar’s argument that the condition was overbroad and violates his First Amendment rights.
So, keep on objecting to unreasonable terms of supervised release. You might just end up getting them vacated!
Labels: SORNA, Supervised Release
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home