Filed: Oct. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-1616 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Charles Wesley Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City _ Submitted: October 5, 2015 Filed: October 14, 2015 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. At a supervised-release revocation hearing, Charles Williams
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-1616 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Charles Wesley Williams lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City _ Submitted: October 5, 2015 Filed: October 14, 2015 [Unpublished] _ Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. At a supervised-release revocation hearing, Charles Williams a..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-1616
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Charles Wesley Williams
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City
____________
Submitted: October 5, 2015
Filed: October 14, 2015
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, BOWMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
At a supervised-release revocation hearing, Charles Williams admitted to the
district court1 that he had violated several of his release conditions while serving a
1
The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
period of supervised release on a federal criminal sentence. The court revoked
supervised release and imposed a revocation sentence of 21 months in prison--the
bottom of the Chapter 7 revocation range--and 1 year of additional supervised release.
On appeal, Williams contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because
it is greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of 18 U.S.C. ยง 3553(a). After
careful review, we conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion. See United
States v. Miller,
557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review). The
judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-