United States v. Jeffrey S. Sauerbry

203 F. App'x 755
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 31, 2006
Docket06-1244
StatusUnpublished

This text of 203 F. App'x 755 (United States v. Jeffrey S. Sauerbry) 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.

Bluebook
United States v. Jeffrey S. Sauerbry, 203 F. App'x 755 (8th Cir. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jeffrey Sauerbry appeals the 12-month prison sentence that the district court 1 imposed after revoking his supervised release. For reversal, Sauerbry argues the sentence was unreasonable because the court failed to consider the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

We conclude that the record reflects the district court considered the appropriate factors, and that the revocation sentence was not unreasonable. See United States v. Nelson, 453 F.3d 1004, 1006 (8th Cir. 2006) (district court must consider advisory sentencing range and policy statements found in Guidelines Chapter 7, and must also consider § 3553(a) factors); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir.2006) (district court need not mechanically list every § 3553(a) consideration when sentencing defendant upon revocation of supervised release); United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir.2005) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005)); United States v. White Face, 383 F.3d 733, 740 (8th Cir.2004) (all that is required in revocation sentencing is evidence that court has considered relevant matters and *756 that some reason be stated for its decision).

Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Micah E. Tyson
413 F.3d 824 (Eighth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Duane Larison
432 F.3d 921 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Michael Nelson
453 F.3d 1004 (Eighth Circuit, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
203 F. App'x 755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-jeffrey-s-sauerbry-ca8-2006.