Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Douglas Packett, 17-3089 (2018)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 17-3089 Visitors: 45
Filed: Feb. 27, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-3089 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Douglas A. Packett, also known as Peckerwood lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ No. 17-3382 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Douglas A. Packett lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeals from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha _ Submitted: February 13, 2018 Filed: F
More
United States Court of Appeals
          For the Eighth Circuit
      ___________________________

              No. 17-3089
      ___________________________

           United States of America

      lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                         v.

Douglas A. Packett, also known as Peckerwood

    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
       ___________________________

              No. 17-3382
      ___________________________

           United States of America

      lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                         v.

               Douglas A. Packett

    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                    ____________

  Appeals from United States District Court
    for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
               ____________

         Submitted: February 13, 2018
           Filed: February 27, 2018
                (Unpublished)
                ____________
Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      In these consolidated appeals, Douglas Packett directly appeals the concurrent
within-Guidelines-range sentences the district court1 imposed upon revoking his
supervised release in the underlying cases. His counsel has moved for leave to
withdraw, and has filed a brief asserting that the sentences are substantively
unreasonable.

       Reviewing Packett’s revocation sentences for an abuse of discretion, see
United States v. Growden, 
663 F.3d 982
, 984 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (standard
of review), we conclude that the sentences are not unreasonable, as both the prison
terms and the supervised-release term are within the statutory limits, and the prison
terms are within the applicable advisory Guidelines range, see United States v.
Petreikis, 
551 F.3d 822
, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive
reasonableness to revocation sentence within Guidelines range). We affirm the
judgments, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw.
                      ______________________________




      1
        The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the District of Nebraska.

                                         -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer