Filed: May 17, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3435 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Terrell Simpson lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: May 6, 2016 Filed: May 17, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Terrell Simpson challenges the district court’s1 finding that he violated the c
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 15-3435 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Terrell Simpson lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: May 6, 2016 Filed: May 17, 2016 [Unpublished] _ Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Terrell Simpson challenges the district court’s1 finding that he violated the co..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 15-3435
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Terrell Simpson
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: May 6, 2016
Filed: May 17, 2016
[Unpublished]
____________
Before GRUENDER, ARNOLD, SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Terrell Simpson challenges the district court’s1 finding that he violated the
conditions of his supervised release and argues that the district court abused its
1
The Honorable Greg Kays, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the
Western District of Missouri.
discretion in sentencing him to two years in prison. Additionally, his counsel has
moved to withdraw. We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its
factual findings, or abuse its discretion in sentencing Simpson. See United States v.
Miller,
557 F.3d 910, 914-917 (8th Cir. 2009) (standards of review); United States
v. Meyer,
483 F.3d 865, 869 (8th Cir. 2007) (discussing reliability of sweat-patch
results).
Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and we affirm the
judgment of the district court.
______________________________
-2-