United States v. Maleke Goodwin

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 26-1698

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Maleke Goodwin

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Western

____________

Submitted: August 20, 2026 Filed: August 25, 2026

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and TRAYNOR, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Maleke Goodwin appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to 9 months in prison. His counsel has moved to withdraw and has filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Valure, 835 F.3d 789, 790 (8th Cir. 2016) (revocation sentence reviewed for abuse of discretion). The record reflects that the district court adequately considered the relevant factors and did not give significant weight to an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment in imposing a within-Guidelines term primarily based on Goodwin’s history on supervised release. See United States v. Pratt, 142 F.4th 1090, 1094-95 (8th Cir. 2025) (sentence may be unreasonable if district court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight to improper factor, or commits clear error of judgment; court may consider history on supervised release; disagreement with how court weighed factors does not justify reversal); United States v. Beckwith, 57 F.4th 630, 632 (8th Cir. 2023) (per curiam) (sentence within Guidelines range presumptively reasonable on appeal).

Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Leonard T. Strand, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.