United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit
Sentencing — modification
The district court had authority to modify the defendant’s conditions of supervised release, two years after sentencing, where the defendant was convicted of a sex offense in state court.
“On appeal, Evans challenges the district court’s modification of the conditions of his supervised release. He argues first that the district court did not have the authority to change the terms when he did not violate the existing terms, and second that the court was not authorized to impose sex-offender treatment because it is unrelated to his crimes of conviction in federal court. We find no merit in either of these points. District courts have wide latitude to modify the terms of supervised release regardless of whether the defendant violated the original terms. Evans’s second argument presents a closer call: the terms of supervised release must be reasonably related to the goals of sentencing—deterrence, rehabilitation, and protecting the public—in light of the history and characteristics of the defendant. Because Evans’s sex-offense conviction was contemporaneous to his drug and firearm convictions, the goals of rehabilitation and protecting the public justified the district court’s decision to impose sex-offender treatment.”
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Randa, J., Wood, J.