United States v. Lou Hobbs

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
____________
No. 22-3099 September Term, 2022
1:95-cr-00104-RCL-1
Filed On: May 8, 2023
United States of America,
Appellee
v.
Lou Hobbs, also known as Lou Brown, also
known as Thomas Hobbs,
Appellant
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BEFORE: Millett, Wilkins, and Katsas, Circuit Judges
JUDGMENT
This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court
for the District of Columbia and on the briefs filed by the parties. See Fed. R. App. P.
34(a)(2); D.C. Cir. Rule 34(j). It is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court's orders entered in 94cr375
and 95cr104 on November 22, 2022, denying appellant's motion for early termination of
supervised release be vacated and that this case be remanded for further proceedings.
As the United States suggests in its brief, this appeal is properly treated as concerning
both orders. See, e.g., Appellee's Brief at ii & n.2; Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244, 248-49
(1992); Messina v. Krakower, 439 F.3d 755, 759 (D.C. Cir. 2006). Because the district
court's reasoning in denying appellant's motion in those cases is not discernible from
the record, we "remand for reconsideration with adequate explanation." See United
States v. Mathis-Gardner, 783 F.3d 1286, 1286-87 (D.C. Cir. 2015).
Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk
is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution
of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R. App.
P. 41(b); D.C. Cir. Rule 41.
Per Curiam