U.S. v. Givens

In prosecution on drug distribution charges, Dist. Ct. did not err in imposing as term of supervised release requirement that defendant remain within jurisdiction of Dist. Ct. where he was being supervised. Instant condition was administrative in nature and can be imposed whenever Dist. Ct. adequately explains need for supervised release in first instance, and record showed that Dist. Ct. adequately explained need for supervised release after defendant’s release from prison. Moreover, Dist. Ct. did not abuse its discretion by failing to include scienter requirement that would limit violations only to “knowing” departures from Dist. Ct.’s geographical judicial district, since there was no contention that defendant lived on or near border of two judicial districts. Remand, though, was required for Dist. Ct. to correct scrivener’s error in written sentencing order, which failed to include Dist. Ct.’s definition of “excessive” use of alcohol in term of supervised release calling for defendant to refrain from excessive use of alcohol.