United States v. John Mitchell Morrow

97 F.3d 1457, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 30059, 1996 WL 520721
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 16, 1996
Docket96-2378
StatusUnpublished

This text of 97 F.3d 1457 (United States v. John Mitchell Morrow) 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. John Mitchell Morrow, 97 F.3d 1457, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 30059, 1996 WL 520721 (8th Cir. 1996).

Opinion

97 F.3d 1457

NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that they are not precedent and generally should not be cited unless relevant to establishing the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, the law of the case, or if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue and no published opinion would serve as well.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee,
v.
John Mitchell MORROW, Appellant.

No. 96-2378.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: September 10, 1996.
Filed: September 16, 1996.

Before BOWMAN, BRIGHT, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

John Mitchell Morrow pled guilty to one misdemeanor count of failure to file an income tax return. The District Court1 sentenced him to six months of imprisonment and a year of supervised release. The court also ordered Morrow to pay a $1,000 fine and a $25 assessment.

Morrow appeals. He argues that the District Court abused its discretion in imposing a term of imprisonment rather than a sentence of probation. We conclude that Morrow's sentence to a six-month term of imprisonment is not reviewable since it is within the guideline range to which he stipulated. See United States v. Dugan, 912 F.2d 942, 944 (8th Cir.1990) (holding sentence within applicable guideline range not reviewable on appeal). Moreover, even if Morrow's sentence were reviewable, when we consider his criminal history it is clear that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in ordering prison rather than probation.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

1

Honorable John A. Jarvey, United States Magistrate Judge for the Northern District of Iowa, who presided over the case with Morrow's written consent pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3401(b)

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

Related

United States v. Katherine Lynn Dugan
912 F.2d 942 (Eighth Circuit, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 F.3d 1457, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 30059, 1996 WL 520721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-john-mitchell-morrow-ca8-1996.