Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Norman DUDLEY Defendant-Appellant
[Unpublished]
After the district court 1 found that Norman Dudley had violated the conditions of his release by walking out of a department store wearing a hat for which he had not paid, the court revoked Dudley's supervised release and imposed a sentence of ten months' imprisonment followed by one year of supervised release. Dudley appeals, arguing that the district court erred in finding he had violated a condition of his supervised release; he claims that leaving with the hat on was an innocent mistake. He also argues that his sentence was unreasonable.
Upon careful review, we hold that the district court did not clearly err in finding by a preponderance of the evidence that Dudley violated his supervised release by committing a new law violation. The surveillance video of Dudley shoplifting was played at the revocation hearing and the record shows that the district court did not find Dudley's excuse plausible. See United States v. Carothers, 337 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2003) (noting that the government must prove that a defendant violated a condition of supervised release by a preponderance of the evidence; we review a district court's finding that a violation occurred for clear error; a district court's credibility determinations are virtually unreviewable on appeal). We further hold that Dudley's prison sentence is reasonable because it is within the advisory guidelines range and the district court considered the appropriate statutory factors. See United States v. Franklin, 397 F.3d 604, 607 (8th Cir. 2005) (concluding that the district court properly considered the relevant § 3553(a) factors because it was aware of the defendant's “numerous and repeated violations of the conditions of his supervised release,” the defendant's suggested range under Chapter 7 of the guidelines, the statutory maximum sentence, and the defendant's history and characteristics).
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
FOOTNOTES
1. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
PER CURIAM.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-2919
Decided: May 04, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)