United States v. Lajuan House
This text of United States v. Lajuan House (United States v. Lajuan House) 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
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 25-3291 ___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
v.
Lajuan D. House
lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________
Submitted: June 18, 2026 Filed: June 24, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________
Before LAVENSKI R. SMITH, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________
PER CURIAM.
Lajuan House appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and imposed an above-Guidelines-range sentence of 24 months in prison with no term
1 The Honorable David Gregory Kays, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. of supervised release to follow. On appeal, House argues the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable revocation sentence.
Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing House. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review). Though House disagrees with the weight given to certain sentencing factors, there is no indication the district court failed to consider a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir. 2006) (discussing substantive reasonableness); see also United States v. Vaca, 38 F.4th 718, 724 (8th Cir. 2022) (explaining that “mere disagreement” with how the court weighed the factors “does not justify reversal”).
Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Lajuan House, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-lajuan-house-ca8-2026.