Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TITUS MARK BRYANT, Defendant - Appellant.
MEMORANDUM*
Titus Mark Bryant appeals from the district court's judgment and challenges the 60-month sentence and a special condition of supervised release imposed following his guilty-plea conviction for three counts of assault resulting in serious bodily injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 113(a)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm the sentence, vacate the special condition of supervised release, and remand for further proceedings.
Bryant contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his post-offense rehabilitation. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The above-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors and the totality of the circumstances, including Bryant's criminal history, the need to protect the public, and the seriousness of the offense. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.
Bryant also contends, and the government concedes, that remand is required because the district court failed to provide advance notice of its intent to impose a special condition of supervised release requiring Bryant to comply with the violent offender registration requirements of any state in which he resides. We agree. See United States v. Wise, 391 F.3d 1027, 1033 (9th Cir. 2004) (“Where a condition of supervised release is not on the list of mandatory or discretionary conditions in the sentencing guidelines, notice is required before it is imposed.”). Accordingly, we vacate the condition and remand to permit the district court to determine whether to reimpose the condition. If the court chooses to reimpose the condition, it shall provide adequate notice to the parties so that an objection can be made. We express no view as to whether the challenged condition is appropriate in this case.
AFFIRMED in part; VACATED in part; and REMANDED.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 15-30179
Decided: June 22, 2016
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)