United States v. Daniel Lopez

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: June 27, 2024
• Docket: 23-3568
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 23-3568 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Daniel L. Lopez

Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield ____________

Submitted: June 20, 2024 Filed: June 27, 2024 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

After violating the conditions of supervised release, Daniel Lopez received a 27-month prison sentence. His counsel, who seeks permission to withdraw, suggests the revocation was based on clearly erroneous findings and the sentence is procedurally and substantively unreasonable. We conclude otherwise. Lopez stipulated to the violations underlying the revocation. See United States v. Edwards, 400 F.3d 591, 592 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam). Then, relying on undisputed facts, the district court1 correctly calculated the advisory range and adequately explained its reasoning. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 916 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying the plain-error standard to unpreserved claims of procedural error). In doing so, it sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3583(e)(3), and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. Dixon, 52 F.4th 731, 733 (8th Cir. 2022) (reviewing a revocation sentence for an abuse of discretion). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________

1 The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. -2-