United States v. Richard Horton

583 F. App'x 568
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedNovember 18, 2014
Docket14-2222
StatusUnpublished

This text of 583 F. App'x 568 (United States v. Richard Horton) 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. Richard Horton, 583 F. App'x 568 (8th Cir. 2014).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Richard Horton directly appeals following the district court’s 1 revocation of his *569 supervised release, arguing that the court (1) abused its discretion in revoking supervised release based on a finding that he committed the Arkansas offense of third degree assault on a household member; and (2) imposed an unreasonable sentence.

We conclude that the court did not clearly err in finding that Horton committed third degree assault, based on the court’s inferences, from the totality of the evidence, that Horton had intended to scare the victim. See United States v. Carothers, 387 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir.2003) (factfinding as to whether violation occurred is reviewed for clear error); United States v. Hensley, 36 F.3d 39, 41 (8th Cir.1994) (statutory construction is reviewed de novo); Harmon v. State, 340 Ark. 18, 8 S.W.3d 472, 477 (2000) (factfin-der may draw upon common knowledge and experience to infer defendant’s intent). The court thus did not abuse its discretion in revoking supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3); Carothers, 337 F.3d at 1019 (standard of review). We also conclude that the within-Guidelinesrange revocation sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir.2009).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

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

Related

United States v. Larry A. Hensley
36 F.3d 39 (Eighth Circuit, 1994)
Anthony (Tony) Gaston v. Anna Ramirez Palmer
387 F.3d 1004 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)
United States v. Petreikis
551 F.3d 822 (Eighth Circuit, 2009)
Harmon v. State
8 S.W.3d 472 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
583 F. App'x 568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-richard-horton-ca8-2014.