United States v. Goins

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
• Decided: May 22, 2026
• Docket: 25-20521
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Case: 25-20521 Document: 53-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED May 22, 2026 No. 25-20521 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk ____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Johnathan E. Goins,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:23-CR-370-1 ______________________________

Before Richman, Southwick, and Willett, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Johnathan E. Goins appeals the sentence imposed after the revocation of his supervised release. He contends that the district court plainly erred by treating the need to promote respect for the law as a dominant sentencing factor.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-20521 Document: 53-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2026

No. 25-20521

It is true that a district court may not consider the factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A) when imposing a sentence after a discretionary revocation under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e). See United States v. Miller, 634 F.3d 841, 844 (5th Cir. 2011). But this revocation was mandatory, not discretionary. Goins admitted that he tested positive for illegal substances more than three times in one year, triggering mandatory revocation under § 3583(g)(4). Because § 3583(g) applied, Goins has not shown that the district court clearly or obviously erred in imposing the revocation sentence. See United States v. Illies, 805 F.3d 607, 609 (5th Cir. 2015). The judgment is AFFIRMED.