United States v. Deron Nixon

── United States v. Deron Nixon ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Date: May 13, 2026 Category: General NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ______________ Nos. 24-1149, 25-2881 ______________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DERON NIXON, Appellant ______________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. No. 2:11-cr-00045-017) U.S. District Judge: Honorable Arthur J. Schwab ______________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) May 11, 2026 ______________ Before: SHWARTZ, MASCOTT, and McKEE, Circuit Judges (Filed: May 13, 2026) ______________ OPINION * ______________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full court and, pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7, does not constitute binding precedent. SHWARTZ, Circuit Judge. Deron Nixon appeals the order revoking his supervised release (“revocation order”). Because his appeal is moot, we will dismiss. I Nixon pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute heroin under 21 U.S.C. § 846. As a result of the Sentencing Guidelines offense level and criminal history, which included vehicle violations as well as drug and assault convictions, he was sentenced to 170 months’ imprisonment followed by eight years’ supervised release, and his term of incarceration was later reduced to 133 months’ imprisonment due to a retroactive change to the Guidelines. His conditions of supervised release prohibited him from, among other things, possessing a firearm and committing other crimes. While on supervised release, Nixon was charged with assaulting the mother of his daughter with a firearm. 1 As a result, a warrant was issued alleging that he violated various conditions of supervised release. 2 The District Court held a revocation hearing where the Government proceeded on only the alleged assault of the mother of Nixon’s child and his possession of a firearm. The District Court considered the testimony of a responding police officer as well as 1 According to the victim, Nixon strangled her and struck her with a firearm before fleeing. The state case was dismissed after the victim failed to appear for court proceedings and failed to respond to law enforcement outreach. 2 Several months later, Nixon was apprehended following a vehicle stop in which he ignored a stop sign, fled from officers, and refused a blood test after they suspected he had been driving while intoxicated. Nixon pled guilty in Pennsylvania state court to resisting arrest and driving with a suspended license. 2 body-worn camera footage, found that Nixon had violated the terms of his supervised release, and sentenced him to forty-two months’ imprisonment without any further supervision. Nixon has since been released. Nixon appeals the revocation order, contending that, despite his release, the order is causing him redressable harms. II 3 As an initial matter, we must satisfy ourselves that we have jurisdiction. “Article III of the Constitution limits the ‘judicial Power’ to ‘Cases’ or ‘Controversies.’” Patel v. United States, 156 F.4th 342, 347 (3d Cir. 2025) (quoting U.S. Const. art. III, §