Filed: Mar. 16, 2004
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 03-2305 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Brian Michael Rohrick, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: February 5, 2004 Filed: March 16, 2004 _ Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Brian Rohrick appeals the district court’s1 imposition of a 14-month prison term upon revocation of his supervised release for
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 03-2305 _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Brian Michael Rohrick, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. * _ Submitted: February 5, 2004 Filed: March 16, 2004 _ Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Brian Rohrick appeals the district court’s1 imposition of a 14-month prison term upon revocation of his supervised release for a..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 03-2305
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the
* Northern District of Iowa.
Brian Michael Rohrick, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: February 5, 2004
Filed: March 16, 2004
___________
Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Brian Rohrick appeals the district court’s1 imposition of a 14-month prison
term upon revocation of his supervised release for a felon-in-possession conviction.
On appeal, he argues that the district court abused its discretion in imposing
additional imprisonment and instead should have imposed inpatient drug treatment
or at least a sentence within the Guidelines suggested range.
1
The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.
After a careful review of the record, we find that the sentence was well below
the maximum sentence allowed under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) and was not an abuse
of discretion. See United States v. Jasper,
338 F.3d 865, 867 (8th Cir. 2003); United
States v. Rodriguez-Favela,
337 F.3d 1020, 1021 (8th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, we
affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-