United States of America v. Clifton Cloyd, also known as Clifton Omar, also known as Omar Muhamed

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2748
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Clifton Cloyd, also known as Clifton Omar, also known as Omar Muhamed
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: May 14, 2018
Filed: May 17, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Clifton Cloyd, proceeding pro se, directly appeals the revocation of his
supervised release, challenging the district court’s jurisdiction. We conclude that the1
The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western1
District of Missouri.

-- 1 of 2 --

district court had jurisdiction to revoke Cloyd’s supervised release because his term
of supervised release had not expired when the court issued the revocation warrant.
See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(i); United States v. Hacker, 450 F.3d 808, 814-15 (8th Cir.
2006) (de novo review; finding that district court had jurisdiction to revoke
supervised release where revocation warrant was issued one day before
supervised-release term expired); see also United States v. Merlino, 785 F.3d 79, 87
n.5 (3d Cir. 2015) (noting that issuance of warrant, even if not executed or served
prior to expiration of release, satisfies § 3583(i)).
The judgment is affirmed.
______________________________
-2-

-- 2 of 2 --