United States of America v. Lbawa M. Thomas

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-2378
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Lbawa M. Thomas
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: September 5, 2024
Filed: September 10, 2024
[Unpublished]
____________
Before GRUENDER, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Lbawa Thomas appeals after the district court revoked his supervised release
and sentenced him to 3 months in prison. On appeal, Thomas argues that the district
court erred by including a 2-year term of supervised release in the written judgment
that was not orally pronounced at sentencing.

-- 1 of 2 --

Upon careful review, we conclude that the oral pronouncement of the sentence
was ambiguous because, while the district court did not specifically state that it was
imposing a new term of supervised release, it ordered Thomas to reside in a
residential reentry center and abide by curfew requirements. See United States v.
Mays, 993 F.3d 607, 622 (8th Cir. 2021) (while oral sentence controls over
conflicting written judgment, mere imprecise language at a hearing will not negate
the court’s obvious intent); United States v. Walker, 80 F.4th 880, 882-83 (8th Cir.
2023) (district court’s failure to specifically address conditions of supervised release
which related to conditions that were orally pronounced was matter of mere
oversight; vacating and remanding for resentencing to impose omitted conditions,
giving defendant an opportunity to object).
Accordingly, because it appears that the omission may have been a mere
oversight, we vacate the sentence and remand to the district court for resentencing,
with clarification regarding its imposition of a new term of supervised release.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --