United States v. Christensen
This text of 637 F. App'x 960 (United States v. Christensen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
While Andrew Christensen was concurrently serving two periods of supervised release on federal criminal sentences, he admitted to the district court1 that he had violated his release conditions in both cases. The court revoked both supervised release terms, and imposed concurrent revocation sentences of 24 months in prison and 12 months of supervised release. On appeal, Christensen contends that the revocation sentences are substantively unreasonable. Upon careful review of the record, including the court’s weighing of relevant sentencing factors at the revocation hearing, we find no basis to conclude that the court abused its discretion. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review). The judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
637 F. App'x 960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-christensen-ca8-2016.