US v. Morris: Sometime in the past (the opinion doesn’t say when) Morris pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography. Several special conditions were imposed as part of his term of supervised release, including several related to mental health/pyscho-sexual evaluations and internet usage restrictions. Four years after his sentence was imposed, Morris moved to modify the conditions of his supervised release under 18 USC 3583(e)(2), challenging six on grounds that they were improperly imposed and didn’t fit his case and two others related to internet usage now violated the Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in Packingham. The district court denied the motion.
On appeal, the Fourth Circuit partially vacated the denial of Morris’ motion. As to the six conditions he alleged were not supported by the facts of his case, the court held that defendants cannot challenge already imposed conditions on such grounds. The time for doing that is initial sentencing and appeal. However, as to the ones challenged due to the change in the law in Packingham, the court held that Morris could seek modification. That constituted “new, unforeseen, or changed legal . . . circumstances” that allowed for reconsideration of those conditions. The court remanded the matter to the district court to take up Morris’ challenge.
No comments:
Post a Comment