United States v. Nicholas Parri

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Diana E. Murphy, Steven M. Colloton and Duane Benton (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4086232-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Robert Kuchar, subject to counsel informing appellant about the procedures for seeking rehearing and for filing a petition for writ of certiorari. [4137895] [13-2444]

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 13-2444
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Nicholas E. Parris
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: March 20, 2014
Filed: March 27, 2014
[Unpublished]
____________
Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Nicholas Eugene Parris directly appeals the district court’s1 judgment revoking
his supervised release, and sentencing him to 24 months in prison and 1 year of
1

The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the
Western District of Missouri.

Appellate Case: 13-2444

Page: 1

Date Filed: 03/27/2014 Entry ID: 4137895

supervised release. Counsel has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967) in which he seeks to withdraw and argues that the sentence was greater
than necessary to achieve the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
This court concludes that the district court did not commit any procedural
sentencing error and the sentence was not substantively unreasonable. The district
court identified the relevant sentencing factors; discussed the nature of Parris’s
violations, his history and characteristics, and the need to deter him from further
criminal conduct. The district court did not err in weighing the sentencing factors,
varying from the Guidelines, and imposing the maximum sentence. See United States
v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 916-17 (8th Cir. 2009) (this court reviews revocation
sentence for abuse of discretion, first ensuring there was no significant procedural
error, and then considering substantive reasonableness; outlining applicable
considerations); United States v. Merrival, 521 F.3d 889, 890-91 (8th Cir. 2008)
(affirming maximum revocation prison sentence of 24 months, where defendant had
been given repeated chances but continued to abuse alcohol and drugs, and district
court found that further supervision would be inadequate to deter or rehabilitate him).
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted, subject to counsel informing
appellant about the procedures for seeking rehearing from this court and for filing a
petition for a writ of certiorari.
______________________________

-2-

Appellate Case: 13-2444

Page: 2

Date Filed: 03/27/2014 Entry ID: 4137895