United States v. Elias, No. 22-3067 (10th Cir. 2022)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Appellate Case: 22-3067 Document: 010110688261 Date Filed: 05/24/2022 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit May 24, 2022 Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GERARDO ELIAS, No. 22-3067 (D.C. No. 6:21-CM-60012-EFM-1) (D. Kan.) Defendant - Appellant. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before MATHESON, BACHARACH, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.** _________________________________ Gerardo Elias appeals the district court’s March 24, 2022 order denying his motion for early termination of supervised release under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(1). The parties have filed a Joint Motion for Summary Disposition. The joint motion requests to summarily vacate the district court’s order due to a supervening change of law, specifically United States v. Hartley, Nos. 22-3010 & 22-3044, 2022 WL 1548483, *7, *11 (10th Cir. May 17, 2022) (holding that a district court is * This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. ** Because this matter is being decided on the parties’ joint motion for summary disposition, the panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. Appellate Case: 22-3067 Document: 010110688261 Date Filed: 05/24/2022 Page: 2 required to make “individualized determinations based on the applicable statutory criteria before imposing a sentence or responding to a request to modify a sentence”; reversing denial of motions for early termination of probation and remanding to district court for further proceedings). Upon consideration, we grant the parties’ Joint Motion for Summary Disposition, and we remand with instructions for the United States District Court for the District of Kansas to vacate its order denying Mr. Elias’s motion to terminate supervised release and to conduct further proceedings consistent with United States v. Hartley. The Clerk is directed to issue the mandate forthwith. Entered for the Court Per Curiam 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.