United States v. Eaton, Lorenzo ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED ORDER
    Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
    United States Court of Appeals
    For the Seventh Circuit
    Chicago, Illinois 60604
    Submitted November 14, 2005*
    Decided November 15, 2005
    Before
    Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge
    Hon. DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge
    Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge
    No. 05-1512
    Appeal from the United States District
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                    Court for the Northern District of
    Plaintiff-Appellee,                 Illinois, Eastern Division
    v.                                     No. 04-CR-160-1
    LORENZO EATON,                               John W. Darrah,
    Defendant-Appellant.                Judge.
    ORDER
    Lorenzo Eaton pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm after a felony
    conviction. See 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1). He was sentenced to 87 months’
    imprisonment and three years’ supervised release. Eaton now appeals his sentence,
    arguing narrowly that the district court erred when it ordered him to submit to
    urine tests as a condition of his supervised release without specifying a particular
    number of tests. The district court left that decision to the probation officer who
    will supervise Eaton, but Eaton correctly recognizes that the court, not the
    probation officer, must determine the number of required drug tests. 18 U.S.C.
    *
    After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that
    oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the
    record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    No. 05-1512                                                                   Page 2
    § 3583(d); United States v. Bonanno, 
    146 F.3d 502
    , 511 (7th Cir. 1998). Eaton’s
    failure to object to this condition at sentencing renders our review for plain error
    only, see United States v. Guy, 
    174 F.3d 859
    , 861 (7th Cir. 1999), but, as the
    government concedes, an inappropriate delegation of judicial authority to the
    probation office may constitute plain error, United States v. Pandiello, 
    184 F.3d 682
    , 688 (7th Cir. 1999). The government thus joins Eaton in urging that the case
    be remanded, and we agree. We REMAND with directions to the district court to
    modify the conditions of supervised release to specify the number of drug tests that
    Eaton must submit to during his supervised release.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 05-1512

Judges: Posner, Wood, Evans

Filed Date: 11/15/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024