Background
Derek Lyn Minger appealed the revocation of his supervised release and the resulting sentence of 28 months in prison followed by 30 months of supervised release.
Minger challenged a supervised-release condition requiring him to participate in sex-offender treatment that may include plethysmograph testing. He acknowledged that existing precedent foreclosed his challenge but raised it to preserve the issue for further review. The government filed an unopposed motion for summary affirmance and alternatively requested additional time to file its brief.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit held that Minger’s challenge to the supervised-release condition was not ripe for review under United States v. Ellis, 720 F.3d 220, 227 (5th Cir. 2013).
Because the claim was unripe, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal, citing United States v. Magana, 837 F.3d 457, 459-60 (5th Cir. 2016). It denied as moot the government’s motion for summary affirmance and alternative motion for an extension of time.
Key Takeaways
- A challenge to a supervised-release condition permitting possible plethysmograph testing was not ripe for appellate review.
- The Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction rather than affirming the condition on the merits.
- The government’s requests for summary affirmance or additional briefing time became moot after dismissal.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that a defendant may not obtain immediate appellate review of every potential application of a supervised-release condition. When a challenge depends on a future event—such as whether a particular testing method will actually be required—the Fifth Circuit may treat the dispute as unripe and dismiss it without addressing the condition’s legality.