United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 16-1848
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                       Maurice Malone, also known as Tito

                      lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                                      ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                   for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque
                                 ____________

                           Submitted: October 14, 2016
                             Filed: October 19, 2016
                                  [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

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

PER CURIAM.

      Maurice Malone appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after revoking
his supervised release. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court
affirms.

      1
      The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Northern District of Iowa.
       The district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Merrival,

, 890 (8th Cir. 2008) (substantive reasonableness of revocation sentence
is reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard). The within-Guidelines-
range sentence was not substantively unreasonable, and the court considered the 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Petreikis, 

, 824 (8th Cir.
2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to revocation sentence
within Guidelines range); United States v. Miller, 

, 917 (8th Cir. 2009)
(under substantive-reasonableness test, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to
consider relevant § 3553(a) factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant
factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors).

       The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
                      ______________________________




                                           -2-