United States v. Ricky Bennett

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 24-1705 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Ricky Shawn Bennett, also known as Shawn

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central ____________

Submitted: June 27, 2024 Filed: July 2, 2024 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Ricky Bennett appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to a term above the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. His

1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence.

We conclude that the sentence was not an abuse of discretion. See United States v. Valure, 835 F.3d 789, 790 (8th Cir. 2016) (observing that the district court’s revocation sentencing decisions are reviewed for an abuse of discretion). There is no indication that 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. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir. 2006) (setting forth the considerations for the substantive reasonableness of a sentence); see also United States v. Michels, 49 F.4th 1146, 1148-49 (8th Cir. 2022) (concluding that a revocation sentence above the Guidelines range was not an abuse of discretion).

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

-2-