U.S. v. Maranda

Dist. Ct. did not err in revoking defendant’s supervised release, even though defendant argued that his term of supervised release had expired by time of violation because term of supervised release began on date his criminal sentence had expired. Record showed that upon expiration of his criminal sentence, defendant remained incarcerated during pendency of determination as to whether defendant would be civilly committed pursuant to Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act. Ct. of Appeals found that defendant’s term of supervised release did not start until defendant was actually freed from custody after civil-commitment hearing was resolved in his favor. As such, defendant was still serving term of supervised release at time he violated conditions of said term.