United States v. Helmer Roberto Jaramillo, Jr.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

United States v. Helmer Roberto Jaramillo, Jr.

Opinion

USCA11 Case: 22-13457 Document: 37-1 Date Filed: 02/06/2024 Page: 1 of 2

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 22-13457 ____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus HELMER ROBERTO JARAMILLO, JR.,

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:18-cr-00226-WFJ-TGW-1 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-13457 Document: 37-1 Date Filed: 02/06/2024 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 22-13457

Before NEWSOM, GRANT, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Helmer Jaramillo, Jr. appeals his 24-month imprisonment sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release, chal- lenging the procedural and substantive reasonableness of his sen- tence. However, Jaramillo was released from custody on January 18, 2024, and is not presently serving an additional term of super- vised release. Therefore, because Jaramillo’s federal sentence has been discharged and no continuing collateral consequences of his sentence can be demonstrated, his appeal no longer presents a live controversy that would “likely . . . be redressed by a favorable judi- cial decision.” Spencer v. Kemna, 523 U.S. 1, 7-16 (1998) (quotation marks omitted) (holding that a court will not presume collateral consequences exist where a judgment revokes parole and noting that assertions that a parole violation could be used in determining future eligibility for parole or could be used to increase future crim- inal sentences were not sufficient showings to overcome moot- ness); United States v. Juvenile Male, 564 U.S. 932, 936-39 (2011) (hold- ing that the Ninth Circuit lacked jurisdiction to consider the case on the merits where, at the time of its decision, the defendant’s ju- venile suspension had expired, he was no longer required to regis- ter as a sex offender, and no other mootness exception applied). Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED, sua sponte, as moot. No petition for rehearing may be filed unless it complies with the timing and other requirements of 11th Cir. R. 40-3 and all other applicable rules.

Reference

Status
Unpublished