UNITED STATES v. KENT (2021)

[Unpublished]

Jerome Davis Kent appeals a 16-month sentence he received for violating the conditions of supervised release. Although the sentence was reduced to 7 months after the district court ¹ credited him with time served, he still says it is too long.

We conclude that the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009) (reviewing the reasonableness of a revocation sentence for an abuse of discretion); United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir. 2008) (stating that a within-Guidelines-range sentence is presumptively reasonable). The record establishes that the district court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3583(e)(3), and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923-24 (8th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and grant counsel permission to withdraw.

FOOTNOTES

1.   The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota.

PER CURIAM.