United States v. Henry Williams, Jr.


PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Lavenski R. Smith, Pasco M. Bowman and Steven M. Colloton Granting [4207575-2] motion to withdraw as counsel filed by Mr. Chris Tarver. [4239045] [14-3037]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-3037 ___________________________ United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Henry Lee Williams, Jr., lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant. ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: December 31, 2014 Filed: January 29, 2015 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Henry Williams, Jr., directly appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him within the Chapter 7 advisory Guidelines range 1 The Honorable James Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Appellate Case: 14-3037 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/29/2015 Entry ID: 4239045 to 11 months in prison and an additional 1 year of supervised release. Williams’s counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief arguing that Williams’s sentence is substantively unreasonable. Williams has not filed a pro se brief. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable revocation sentence. See United States v. Growden, 663 F.3d 982, 984 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (describing appellate review of revocation sentences); United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to revocation sentence within Guidelines range). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw. ______________________________ -2- Appellate Case: 14-3037 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/29/2015 Entry ID: 4239045

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?