US v. Spangle, No. 09-50508

Sixth Amendment Does Not Apply to Supervised Release Proceedings

In US v. Spangle, No. 09-50508, defendant's appeal from the twenty-four-month term of imprisonment imposed upon revocation of his supervised release, the court affirmed where 1) because the revocation of supervised release is indistinguishable from the revocation of parole, the Sixth Amendment had no application to supervised release proceedings; 2) in any event, any error in the revocation order was harmless because defendant admitted to violating the terms of his supervised release; and 3) the context of defendant's threat did not necessitate the conclusion that there was an objective basis for recusal.

As the court wrote:  "Defendant-Appellant Kenneth Lyle Spangle appeals from the twenty-four-month term of imprisonment imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. Spangle contends that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself, that the district court judge should have recused himself, and that the sentence imposed was procedurally and substantively unreasonable. Because all of Spangle's contentions are without merit, we affirm the judgment and sentence."

Related Resources

• Read the Ninth Circuit's Decision in US v. Spangle, No. 09-50508