Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Sentencing — supervised release — revocation

Sentencing — supervised release — revocation

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — supervised release — revocation

A condition of supervised release, that the defendant not participate in his former occupation of tax preparer, is not unconstitutionally vague.

“We are unconvinced by Preacely’s due process challenge to the special condition of supervised release. A condition of supervised release is unconstitutionally vague if it fails to provide a person of reasonable intelligence adequate notice of what conduct is prohibited. United States v. Schave, 186 F.3d 839, 843 (7th Cir. 1999). The primary problem with Preacely’s argument is that he raises it too late. The time for Preacely to challenge the condition was at sentencing or on direct appeal, not at his revocation hearing. See United States v. Flagg, 481 F.3d 946, 950 (7th Cir. 2007) (‘The proper method for challenging a conviction and sentence is through direct appeal or collateral review, not a supervised release revocation proceeding.’). In any event, we are unpersuaded that the contested special condition of supervised release failed to make it clear that Preacely should avoid being involved in the day-to-day operation of Personal Tax, particularly when the provision is considered in conjunction with the district court’s comments at sentencing.”

Affirmed.

12-1714 U.S. v. Preacely

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Conlon, J., Rovner, J.

Leave a Comment