If there is probable cause to believe that a probationer or a person on supervised release has violated a condition of his probation or release, he may be arrested, and, upon arrest, shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the court having jurisdiction over him. A probation officer may make such an arrest wherever the probationer or releasee is found, and may make the arrest without a warrant. The court having supervision of the probationer or releasee, or, if there is no such court, the court last having supervision of the probationer or releasee, may issue a warrant for the arrest of a probationer or releasee for violation of a condition of release, and a probation officer or United States marshal may execute the warrant in the district in which the warrant was issued or in any district in which the probationer or releasee is found.
Notes of Decisions
United States v. Dante Vargas-Amaya, 389 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 2004).
· cites it 4× “, 18 U.S.C. § 3606 (stating that, if probable cause of a violation of the terms of release exists, a supervised re-leasee can be arrested with or without a *905 warrant).”
United States v. Reynard, 220 F. Supp. 2d 1142 (S.D. Cal. 2002).
· cites it 6× “§ 3606 (“A probation officer may make such an arrest wherever the probationer or releasee is found, and may make the arrest without a warrant”).”
United States v. Donald Reyes, Robert Jubic, 283 F.3d 446 (2d Cir. 2002).
· cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 3606 . In sum, probation officers, “charged with monitoring [an] offender’s performance, owe[ ] a responsibility to the public to ensure that [the offender] who pose[s] a threat to public safety [is] not permitted to remain free, absent compliance with conditions…”
United States v. Lucas, 499 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 2007).
· cites it 2× “Similarly, 18 U.S.C. § 3606 , dealing with the apprehension of probation violators and those on supervised release, speaks in terms of "arrest.”
Mont v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 1826 (2019).
“; see 18 U.S.C. § 3606 (explaining that the District Court "may issue a warrant for the arrest" of the releasee for "violation of a condition of release").”
United States v. Joseph Ivy, 678 F. App'x 369 (6th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 5× “Defendant contends this delay violated his right to appear before the court “without unnecessary delay” under 18 U.S.C. § 3606 , and to due process under the Fifth Amendment.”
United States v. Antonio D. Stephens, 424 F.3d 876 (9th Cir. 2005).
“f the conditions specified by the court, keep informed of the person’s conduct and condition, aid the person in bringing about improvements in his conduct and condition, be responsible for the supervision of such persons, keep informed concerning the conduct, condition and…”
United States v. Paul G. Sczubelek, 402 F.3d 175 (3rd Cir. 2005).
“§ 14135a(a)(40)(A), also adds an element of law enforcement, but this authority is similar to the authority granted by 18 U.S.C. § 3606 to probation officers to arrest probationers for violations of probation.”
United States v. Collazo-Castro, 660 F.3d 516 (1st Cir. 2011).
· cites it 2× ““While section 3583 extends the jurisdiction of a court to hold revocation hearings after the term of supervised release has expired, [ 18 U.S.C. § 3606 ] actually governs the issuance of warrants for the arrest of probationers or supervised releasees.”
United States v. Santana, 526 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2008).
“1(a)(1); see also 18 U.S.C. § 3606 (“[U]pon arrest, [a person alleged to have violated terms of supervised release] shall be taken without unnecessary delay before the court having jurisdiction over him.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.