UNITED STATES v. HOLMES (2018)

[Unpublished]

In this direct criminal appeal, Michael Holmes challenges the order of the district court ¹ revoking his supervised release and imposing a 6-month sentence, followed by 6 months of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has submitted a brief arguing that the district court abused its discretion by revoking Holmes’s supervised release, and that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.

Upon careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by revoking Holmes’s supervised release. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 914 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review). We further conclude that Holmes’s sentence was not unreasonable, as the district court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; there was no indication the court overlooked a relevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors, see United States v. Johnson, 827 F.3d 740, 744 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review); and the sentence was within the Guidelines range, see United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we grant counsel leave to withdraw, and affirm.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.

PER CURIAM.