United States v. Taquan Johnson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: October 6, 2020
• Docket: 19-3467
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 19-3467 ___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Taquan Laquise Johnson, (originally named Taquan Laguise Johnson), also known as MooMoo,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant. ____________

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

Submitted: October 1, 2020 Filed: October 6, 2020 [Unpublished] ____________

Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM. Taquan Johnson appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and imposed sentence. The court sentenced Johnson to twelve months in prison and one year of supervised release, with a special condition that the first 180 days of his supervised release be spent in a residential reentry center. His counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the treatment of the period in the reentry center as part of Johnson’s term of supervised release rather than his term of imprisonment.

After careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by requiring Johnson to spend the first 180 days of his supervised release in a reentry center. The district court has broad discretion to impose special conditions that are reasonably related to 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors, involve no greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably necessary, and are consistent with any pertinent Sentencing Commission policy statements. See 18 U.S.C. § 3563(b)(11) (court may require probationer to reside at a community corrections facility for all or part of the term of probation); U.S.S.G. § 5B1.3(e)(1) (residence in a community treatment center, halfway house or similar facility may be imposed as a condition of probation); United States v. Melton, 666 F.3d 513, 517-18 (8th Cir. 2012).

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

1 The Honorable James M. Moody, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

-2-