Free Mandate of 9th Circuit - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

I t UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, No. 05-10090
D.C. No. CR-03-50096-EHC
Plaintiff - Appellee,
V- .
I JUDGMENT
CHARLOTTE THOI,
Defendant — Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix). P
This cause came on to be heard on the Transcript of the Record from the
United States District Court for the District of Arizona (Phoenix) and was duly
submitted.
On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered and adjudged by this
Court, that the judgment of the said District Court in this cause be, and hereby is
AFFIRMED. -
Filed and entered 12/12/05
A moe COQYTERSON
2f’§a‘2"2%°Ic$€#r.
Arrest--
ml »— 5 me
. Q. · E
‘°"’ · D p .....
I Case 2:O3—cr—50096-EHC Document 48 Filed O1/O5/2006 Page 1 of 4

rj J ~ ‘ J°‘ `
I = FILE D
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
DEC 12 2005
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS CATHY A CATTERSCN CLERK
- u.s. éoum or Appears
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, U No. 05-10090
Plaintiff- Appellee, D.C. No. CR-03-50096-EHC
v.
MEMORANDUM*
CHARLOTTE THOI,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Arizona
A Earl H. Carroll, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 5, 2005"'
Before: GOODWIN, W. FLETCHER, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Charlotte Thoi appeals the district court’s revocation of her supervised
release and the 24-month sentence imposed upon revocation. We have jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. As Thoi did not obj ect in the district court we apply
the plain error standard of review, see Jones v. United States, 527 U.S. 373, 388
" This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be
cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
H This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Case 2:O3—cr—50096-EHC Document 48 Filed O1/O5/2006 Page 2 of 4

if ’ . . *
(1999), and we affirm.
Thoi contends that the district court "at`firmatively misadvised" her of the
consequences of admitting violations of her supervised release when it did not
inform her that it could impose a term of supervised release following her prison
sentence. However, because the district court is not required to advise a defendant
of the maximum term of supervised release, it may impose upon revocation of
supervised release, see Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 32.2, appe1lant’s
contention fails. See United States v. Segal, 549 F .2d 1293, 1298 (9th Cir. 1977)
(noting the protections of Rule l l do not apply to probation revocation
proceedings).
Further, the district court did not commit plain error in rnisadvising Thoi
prior to her admissions that "she could be sentenced to up to two years" when she
could have received a higher sentence, because her actual two-year—sentence
comported with the district cou1t’s original statements. See Johnson v. United
States, 520 U.S. 461, 467 (1997). .
l
Thoi also contends that, because she was arrested pursuant to an unsworn
warrant, the district court lacked juiisdiction over the revocation proceedings.
However, as Thoi was arrested during the term of her supervised release, the
1 district court had proper jurisdiction. See United States v. Ortuno-Higareda, 421
2
Case 2:O3—cr—50096-EHC Document 48 Filed O1/O5/2006 Page 3 of 4

I /,2 I ` ` R ~.
l 'i -! {
F.3d 917, 921-22 (9th Cir. 2005). As Thoi’s arrest was pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
i § 35 83(c)(3), which implicitly permits warrantless arrests, "noncompliance with
1 the Warrant C1ause" does not create "a jurisdictional defect where revocation
. occurs before expiration ofthe supervised release term." Id. at 921.
AFFIRMED. ‘
é2Z$H‘¢E£€K¥iE¤SON
Clerk 0f_ Court _
- Arrest-·
5 JAM » ts wsu? .
i ·` E
3 ...,. . . QP r
by:,, n? 2 ...
¤e.F2;9;ai.i.’ c
Case 2:O3—cr—50096-EHC Document 48 Filed O1/O5/2006 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-50096-EHC

Document 48

Filed 01/05/2006

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-50096-EHC

Document 48

Filed 01/05/2006

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-50096-EHC

Document 48

Filed 01/05/2006

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:03-cr-50096-EHC

Document 48

Filed 01/05/2006

Page 4 of 4