Collateral order doctrine confers appellate jurisdiction on defendant’s appeal of denial of request for immediate determination of supervised release

JURISDICTION/DUE PROCESS United States v. Romero, No. 07-1298, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Jan. 4, 2008)(Colorado). Appeal of district court’s order denying defendant’s request for immediate determination of whether any revoked supervised release time should run concurrently with state prison sentence. HELD: (1) Defendant’s appeal of district court’s order denying request for immediate determination of whether any revoked federal supervised release time should run concurrently with state prison sentence is within appellate court’s jurisdiction under collateral order doctrine. (2) District court’s decision to delay holding hearing on revocation of supervised release resulting from state court convictions until defendant completed state confinement was reasonable. Even if it is assumed that defendant is suffering some collateral adverse consequences as result of pending federal detainer relating to unadjudicated supervised release revocation while confined on state convictions, not every state action carrying adverse consequences for prison inmates automatically activates due process right. Read the opinion here.