USA v. Johh Jerome Carter, No. 11-13116 (11th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ Nos. 11-13116; 11-13604 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEVENTH CIRCUIT MARCH 2, 2012 JOHN LEY CLERK D.C. Docket Nos. 1:96-cr-00026-CB-1, 1:95-cr-00220-CB-M-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOHN JEROME CARTER, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama ________________________ (March 2, 2012) Before TJOFLAT, BARKETT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This is an appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) of the sentence the district court imposed on John Jerome Carter after revoking his supervised release. The court revoked the supervised release and sentenced Carter to a 30-months term of imprisonment on finding that he had violated the conditions of his release by having sexual intercourse with a 13-year old girl. In United States v. Jones, 899 F.2d 1097, 1102 (11th Cir.1990), overruled on other grounds by United States v. Morrill, 984 F.2d 1136 (11th Cir.1993), we held that a district court, after imposing sentence, must give the parties an opportunity to object to the court's ultimate findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the manner in which the sentence is pronounced, and must elicit a full articulation of the grounds upon which any objection is based. The district court failed to elicit Carter s objections as required by Jones in this case.1 Without a statement of Carter s objections, we cannot afford this appeal meaningful review. The judgment of the district court is accordingly vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings. SO ORDERED. 1 The court asked Carter if he had [a]nything further? This was inadequate to comply with Jones s mandate. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.