United States v. Izabela Gawron

Summary

The Seventh Circuit held that a defendant's challenge to the imposition of supervised release based on her likely deportation was waived, and her challenge to the travel restriction condition lacking a scienter requirement failed plain error review, despite the 2016 Guidelines adding "knowingly" to U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(c)(3). The court modified the written judgment to conform to the oral pronouncement defining "jurisdiction" as the federal judicial district. The court advised district courts to ensure travel restriction conditions include the 2016 amendment's scienter requirement.

Holdings

1. The challenge to the imposition of supervised release was waived because the defendant did not object and specifically declined the court's invitation to elaborate. Alternatively, the district court's explanation was procedurally sufficient.
2. Assuming error in omitting a scienter component, the defendant cannot show that it affected her substantial rights, so plain error review fails.
3. The written judgment must be amended to include the definition of 'jurisdiction' as 'federal judicial district' to conform to the oral pronouncement.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by imposing a term of supervised release on a defendant likely to be deported.
2. Whether the supervised release condition prohibiting leaving the jurisdiction without permission lacks a scienter requirement.
3. Whether the written judgment conflicts with the oral pronouncement regarding the definition of 'jurisdiction'.

Disposition

affirmed