United States v. Shane See Walker

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedApril 7, 2026
Docket24-3423
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Shane See Walker (United States v. Shane See Walker) 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. Shane See Walker, (8th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 24-3423 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Shane Dean See Walker

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of North Dakota - Western ____________

Submitted: April 2, 2026 Filed: April 7, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

Before SMITH, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Shane Dean See Walker appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to a prison term of 24 months and two additional months

1 The Honorable Daniel M. Traynor, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota. of supervised release. After careful review, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence. See United States v. Richey, 758 F.3d 999, 1001 (8th Cir. 2014) (standard of review); United States v. Maluoth, 121 F.4th 1158, 1163 (8th Cir. 2024) (district court abuses its discretion when it fails to consider relevant factor that should have received significant weight, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or considers only appropriate factors but in weighing them commits clear error of judgment). The district court considered the relevant factors and the record evidence supported the sentence imposed. See United States v. Misquadace, 778 F.3d 717, 719 (8th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (district courts have wide latitude to weigh the relevant factors and assign some greater weight than others in determining appropriate sentence); United States v. Rodd, 966 F.3d 740, 748 (8th Cir. 2020) (district court presumed to have considered mitigating factors advanced by defendant).

Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________

-2-

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

Related

United States v. Christina Richey
758 F.3d 999 (Eighth Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Jon Misquadace
778 F.3d 717 (Eighth Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Jeffrey Rodd
966 F.3d 740 (Eighth Circuit, 2020)
United States v. Mar Maluoth
121 F.4th 1158 (Eighth Circuit, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Shane See Walker, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-shane-see-walker-ca8-2026.