United States v. Roberto V. Rivera

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, Kermit E. Bye and Lavenski R. Smith (UNPUBLISHED); Granting [4169840-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Jason J. Tupman. [4199301] [14-1988]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-1988 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Roberto V. Rivera lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Sioux Falls ____________ Submitted: September 17, 2014 Filed: September 23, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Appellate Case: 14-1988 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/23/2014 Entry ID: 4199301 Roberto Rivera directly appeals the statutory-maximum sentence that the district court1 imposed upon revoking his probation. For reversal, he argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review, we conclude that the sentence is not unreasonable, because the court properly considered the Chapter 7 policy statements and appropriate 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and gave supporting reasons for its decision. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 924 (8th Cir. 2006) (affirming statutorymaximum revocation sentence where district court justified decision by giving supporting reasons); United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005)). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. -2- Appellate Case: 14-1988 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/23/2014 Entry ID: 4199301

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?