United States v. Michael Clemmon


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: DUANE BENTON, JAMES B. LOKEN and DIANA E. MURPHY (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [3715083-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Larry C. Pace. [3766250] [10-2917]

Download PDF
United States v. Michael Clemmon Doc. 0 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 10-2917 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Michael D. Clemmons, Appellant. * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * * ___________ Submitted: November 22, 2010 Filed: March 14, 2011 ___________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Michael Clemmons appeals the judgment revoking his term of supervised release and sentencing him to eighteen months in prison. He argues that the district court1 committed procedural error when, during the revocation hearing, the court received a confidential sentencing recommendation from the probation officer. This contention is without merit. See United States v. Davis, 151 F.3d 1304, 1306 (10th Cir. 1998); United States v. Johnson, 935 F.3d 47, 51 (4th Cir. 1991). Clemmons, who was represented by counsel at the hearing, raised no question whether the court The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 1 Appellate Case: 10-2917 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/14/2011 Entry ID: 3766250 Dockets.Justia.com had obtained from the probation officer, ex parte, factual evidence that should be disclosed under Rule 32.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Accordingly, this court affirms the judgment of the district court. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted, subject to counsel informing Clemmons about procedures for seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 10-2917 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/14/2011 Entry ID: 3766250

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?