Jury rights in release revocations
Baldemoro v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- James Baldemoro asked the Supreme Court to review whether revoking supervised release based on facts a judge found under a lower proof standard violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments when a person has already received the maximum prison term for the underlying offense.
- Who it affects
- Baldemoro did not receive Supreme Court review of his constitutional challenge.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Court refused to hear his case (denied review), so it did not decide that constitutional question.
The dispute concerns what proof a judge needs to revoke federal supervised release.
Question presented
Whether revoking supervised release under 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(3), on the basis of facts found by a judge under a preponderance of the evidence standard, violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments as applied to a defendant who has already been punished by the maximum prison term prescribed by his underlying statute of conviction.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.