United States v. Ahmadzai

A term of supervised release is "automatically tolled during a period of state custody without a judicial tolling order."

Hares Ahmadzai was convicted for making false statements on his passport application and unlawfully attempting to procure citizenship. After serving 51 months in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons, while on a supervised release, Ahmadzai was taken into state custody for more than six months. Absent tolling, Ahmadzai’s term of supervision would have expired February 6, 2012; with tolling, “Ahmadzai’s term would have expired on August 19, 2012.” On June 15, 2012, the district court approved a Petition on Probation and Supervised Release and issued a bench warrant, explaining that “state custody automatically tolled Ahmadzai’s supervised release term without any court intervention.” The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo whether the district court had jurisdiction in revoking Ahmadzai’s term of supervised release. District courts have the authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3583 to impose supervised releases, and after a term expires, courts may revoke a term of supervised release “provided that a valid warrant or summons was issued during the term based on a violation of any supervised release condition.” The panel looked at the language of 18 U.S.C. § 3624(e), which stated “a term of supervised release does not run during in period in which the person is imprisoned…” and determined that there was support for the district court’s judgment. The statute neither referenced a judicial tolling order nor conditioned the running of the term on judicial action. The panel determined that Ahmadzai’s “period of imprisonment in state custody did not toll his supervised release term,” and the district court was authorized to revoke it based on the bench warrant signed June 15, 2012. The panel held that Ahmadzai’s supervision was properly revoked because the district court “issued a bench warrant within the period of the tolled supervised release term.” AFFIRMED.