United States v. Andrew Hulen
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CLIFTON, Circuit Judge:
The issue in this case is whether admissions made during mandatory sex-offender treatment may be used against a defendant to revoke supervised release. Answering that question requires us to consider whether a proceeding to revoke supervised release is a “criminal case” for purposes of the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
While on supervised release, Andrew Hulen violated various conditions of his release. He admitted those violations during sex-offender treatment, in which he was required to participate as a condition of his release. Based on…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States Parole Commission v. GeraghtySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Minnesota v. MurphySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Chavez v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Middendorf v. HenrySupreme Court of the United States · 1976
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. Shelton KetterCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2018
- Daniel Chavez v. David RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2021
- United States v. Roberto YepezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2024
- United States v. Alexander OrihoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
- United States v. Daniel KaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2020
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.