United States v. Michael Petreikis
This text of 556 F. App'x 573 (United States v. Michael Petreikis) 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
Michael R. Petreikis appeals the twelvemonth prison sentence the district court 1 *574 imposed upon' revoking his supervised release for the second time. See United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 825 (8th Cir.2009) (affirming Petreikis’s first revocation sentence). Petreikis argues his sentence “was greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of sentencing, and was therefore unreasonable.” In Petreikis’s view, the district court “failed to give adequate weight to important factors,” including Petreikis’s advanced age, failing health, efforts to improve the circumstances of his supervised release before absconding, and the lack of “evidence that he committed any new offenses” “[d]uring his absence from supervision.” Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court properly considered the relevant sentencing factors, see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3583(e)(3), and did not impose an unreasonable revocation sentence. See United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110-11 (8th Cir.2008); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923-24 (8th Cir.2006).
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B(1), (4).
. The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
556 F. App'x 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-michael-petreikis-ca8-2014.