Opinion
23-10716
07-08-2024
United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Melvin Umana-Garcia, Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:22-CR-318-1
Before HAYNES, WILLETT, and OLDHAM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM [*]
Melvin Umana-Garcia pleaded guilty to illegal reentry after removal from the United States. He appeals his sentence, arguing that he should not have received a 10-level enhancement based on his two previous felony convictions.
"Whether an appeal is moot is a jurisdictional matter, since it implicates the Article III requirement that there be a live case or controversy." United States v. Heredia-Holguin, 823 F.3d 337, 340 (5th Cir. 2016) (en banc) (citation omitted). "We review the question of mootness de novo, raising the issue sua sponte if necessary." Velasquez-Castillo v. Garland, 91 F.4th 358, 362 (5th Cir. 2024) (citation omitted).
While his appeal was pending, Umana-Garcia was released from prison. And because the district court did not impose any term of supervised release, there is no relief this court could grant should Umana-Garcia prevail. See United States v. Vega, 960 F.3d 669, 672 (5th Cir. 2020) ("A case becomes moot only when it is impossible for a court to grant any effectual relief whatever to the prevailing party." (citation omitted)); Herndon v. Upton, 985 F.3d 443, 448 (5th Cir. 2021) ("[A]n appeal of a district court's order is not mooted by a prisoner's release from custody so long as that court has authority to modify an ongoing term of supervised release.").
Accordingly, the appeal is DISMISSED AS MOOT.
[*] This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.