United States v. Hulen, No. 16-30160 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseA proceeding to revoke supervised release is not a criminal case for purposes of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment revoking defendant's supervised release based on his admissions during mandatory sex-offender treatment. The panel held that the district court did not violate defendant's right against self-incrimination because that right extended only to prohibit the use of an admission in a criminal case.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed the district court’s judgment revoking the defendant’s supervised release based on the defendant’s admissions during mandatory sex-offender treatment. The panel held that a proceeding to revoke supervised release is not a criminal case for purposes of the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination, and that the district court therefore did not violate the defendant’s right against self-incrimination by revoking his supervised release based on his admissions.
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.