United States v. Travis Crissler

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-1247 ___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Travis Michael Crissler

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________

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

Submitted: May 1, 2026 Filed: May 6, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Travis Crissler appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed upon revoking his supervised release for a third time. On appeal, he argues the above-Guidelines-

1 The Honorable Peter D. Welte, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of North Dakota. range 24-month prison term with no supervised release to follow is a substantively unreasonable sentence.

After review, we conclude that the sentence is not substantively unreasonable, as the record reflects that the district court adequately considered the relevant sentencing factors and did not give significant weight to an improper factor or commit clear error of judgment in weighing factors. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir. 2006). The district court did not abuse its discretion in weighing some relevant factors more heavily than others, see United States v. Bridges, 569 F.3d 374, 379 (8th Cir. 2009); or by imposing the instant sentence to run consecutively to certain of Crissler’s state court sentences, see United States v. Johnson, 827 F.3d 740, 745 (8th Cir. 2016).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. ______________________________

-2-