United States v. Anthony Clay

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: November 20, 2025
• Docket: 25-1253
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-1253 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Anthony Dwayne Clay, also known as Oak

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________

Submitted: November 17, 2025 Filed: November 20, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SMITH, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Anthony Clay appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief arguing that the district court

1 The Honorable Stephen H. Locher, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. erred in concluding he committed the charged violations, deciding to revoke Clay’s supervised release, and imposing a substantively unreasonable sentence.

After careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err in finding that Clay committed a Grade A violation of his supervised release or abuse its discretion in revoking his supervised release. See United States v. Black Bear, 542 F.3d 249, 252 (8th Cir. 2008) (reviewing a decision to revoke supervised release for abuse of discretion and the subsidiary finding as to whether a violation occurred for clear error). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a revocation sentence. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009) (discussing abuse-of-discretion review for the substantive reasonableness of a revocation sentence).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm. ______________________________

-2-