UNITED STATES v. OLIVER (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Joseph Eugene OLIVER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 19-1817

Decided: October 29, 2019

Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. Stuart P. Huffman, Whiteaker & Wilson, Springfield, MO for appellant. Josephine L. Stockard, Asst. U.S. Atty., Springfield, MO, for appellee.

[Unpublished]

Joseph Oliver appeals after the district court ¹ revoked his supervised release, and sentenced him to 12 months and 1 day in prison and 2 years of supervised release. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the sentence. Oliver has not filed a pro se brief.

After careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Oliver, as it properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; there was no indication that it overlooked a relevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors, see United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (substantive reasonableness of revocation sentence is reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); see also United States v. White Face, 383 F.3d 733, 740 (8th Cir. 2004) (district court need not mechanically list every § 3553(a) factor when sentencing defendant upon revocation; all that is required is consideration of relevant matters and some reason for court’s decision); and the sentence was within the advisory Guidelines range, and below the statutory limit, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

PER CURIAM.