United States v. Samuel Xux-Mucu

USCA4 Appeal: 25-4315 Doc: 36 Filed: 06/25/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-4315

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SAMUEL XUX-MUCU, a/k/a Gabriel Xux-Mucu, a/k/a Samuel Xux-Muca, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.

M. Hannah Lauck, Chief District Judge. (3:25-cr-00056-MHL-1)

Submitted: April 17, 2026 Decided: June 25, 2026

Before QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judge, and KEENAN and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Geremy C. Kamens, Federal Public Defender, Salvatore M. Mancina, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Joseph S. Camden, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Todd W.

Blanche, Deputy Attorney General, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Lindsay Halligan, United States Attorney and Special Attorney, Robert S.

Day, Assistant United States Attorney, Daniel J. Honold, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-4315 Doc: 36 Filed: 06/25/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Samuel Xux-Mucu seeks to appeal the district court’s imposition of a one-year term of supervised release following his conviction for possession of fraudulent immigration documents, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1546(a). The district court imposed a sentence of time served and Xux-Mucu was then removed from the United States. During the pendency of this appeal, however, Xux-Mucu completed his term of supervised release. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal as moot. See United States v. Ketter, 908 F.3d 61, 66 (4th Cir. 2018) (noting that challenge to sentence becomes moot when entire sentence, including term of supervised release, has been served). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED