United States v. Lowell Johnson


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Raymond W. Gruender and Duane Benton (UNPUBLISHED). Granting [4186736-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. John P. Messina. [4235487] [14-2690]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-2690 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Lowell Duane Johnson lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Sioux City ____________ Submitted: January 14, 2015 Filed: January 20, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Lowell Johnson directly appeals following the district court’s1 revocation of his supervised release. For reversal, he argues that the court (1) erred in finding that 1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. Appellate Case: 14-2690 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/20/2015 Entry ID: 4235487 he violated his release conditions, and (2) imposed an unreasonable revocation sentence. We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in revoking supervised release, given the court’s finding that Johnson had violated multiple release conditions, based both on Johnson’s admissions and the testimony of his probation officer, which the court was entitled to credit. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3); United States v. Carothers, 337 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review; court’s credibility determinations at revocation hearing are virtually unreviewable on appeal). We also conclude that the court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. The court carefully explained its sentencing decision, commenting on Johnson’s repeated violations of his release conditions, the seriousness of the violations, his lack of candor with his probation officer, and other relevant matters. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review); United States v. Thunder, 553 F.3d 605, 608-09 (8th Cir. 2009) (revocation sentence above advisory range was not substantively unreasonable where defendant repeatedly violated supervised release); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 924 (8th Cir. 2006) (affirming statutory maximum revocation sentence where district court justified decision by giving supporting reasons). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 14-2690 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/20/2015 Entry ID: 4235487

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?