U.S. v. Wainwright

Full title: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Lee WAINWRIGHT…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Dec 28, 2001

22 F. App'x 908 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

22 Fed.Appx. 908 (9th Cir. 2001) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard Lee WAINWRIGHT, Defendant-Appellant. No. 01-30084. D.C. No. CR-98-00050-RSL. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. December 28, 2001

Submitted December 17, 2001. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding.

Before SCHROEDER, Chief Judge, TROTT, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Richard Lee Wainwright appeals the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and affirm.

Wainwright contends the district court erred by revoking his supervised release because there was no evidence that he violated the terms of his release. We review the district court's decision to revoke a term of supervised release for an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Schmidt, 99 F.3d 315, 319-20 (9th Cir.1996), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Palomba, 182 F.3d 1121, 1123 (9th Cir.1999).

Wainwright's contention is without merit. At the revocation hearing, evidence

Page 909.

was presented that there was a struggle between Wainwright and his ex-girlfriend, and that his ex-girlfriend sustained some injuries. Because there was evidence that Wainwright committed an assault, the district court did not abuse its discretion by revoking Wainwright's supervised release. ¹ See Schmidt, 99 F.3d at 320 (noting violation of supervised release may be found by only by a preponderance of the evidence); Washington v. Bland, 71 Wash.App. 345, 860 P.2d 1046, 1050-51 (Wash.Ct.App.1993); Wash. Rev.Code § 9A.36.041(1) (2001).

1 The government's motion to supplement the record is GRANTED. The government has requested we dismiss Wainwright's appeal under the fugitive disentitlement doctrine. As Wainwright has been returned to custody, we exercise our discretion not to dismiss his appeal. See Ortega-Rodriguez v. United States, 507 U.S. 234, 242, 249, 113 S.Ct. 1199, 122 L.Ed.2d 581 (1993); United States v. Freelove, 816 F.2d 479 (9th Cir.1987) (order).

AFFIRMED.