US v. Anthony Miller, No. 12-4904 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4904 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANTHONY SCOTT MILLER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:11-cr-00078-1) Submitted: February 26, 2013 Decided: March 22, 2013 Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne, Appellate Counsel, David R. Bungard, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin II, United States Attorney, Jennifer L. Rada, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Anthony Scott Miller appeals the district court judgment imposing a sentence of eight months imprisonment and a thirty-year term of supervised release following the revocation of Miller s supervised release term. On appeal, Miller challenges a special condition of supervised release requiring him to undergo a psychosexual evaluation and to participate in any recommended treatment program. District courts are We affirm. afforded broad latitude in imposing conditions of supervised release, which we review for abuse of discretion. (4th Cir. 2012). United States v. Worley, 685 F.3d 404, 407 Although a particular condition of supervised release need not be connected to the underlying offense, id., the sentencing court must conditions it imposes. provide an explanation for the United States v. Armel, 585 F.3d 182, 186 (4th Cir. 2009). Miller psychosexual challenges evaluation recommendations, arguing the and that special condition compliance his with underlying requiring treatment conviction for failing to register and update registration as required by the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act ( SORNA ), 18 U.S.C. ยง 2250 (2006), does not involve actual sexual misconduct, and that his only sex offense conviction occurred in 2003. imposing the special condition 2 of supervised release, In the district court took into account that Miller s underlying conviction was a SORNA violation, and considered his history and characteristics, including his admission to his probation officer that he had masturbated to images of minors. these circumstances, district find no abuse imposition court s we of the of Under discretion special in the condition of supervised release. Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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.
