Filed: Jan. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2960 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Rowland F. Zerba, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids _ Submitted: January 17, 2018 Filed: January 19, 2018 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Rowland Zerba challenges the dis
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 17-2960 _ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Rowland F. Zerba, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids _ Submitted: January 17, 2018 Filed: January 19, 2018 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In this direct criminal appeal, Rowland Zerba challenges the dist..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 17-2960
___________________________
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Rowland F. Zerba, Jr.
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
____________
Submitted: January 17, 2018
Filed: January 19, 2018
[Unpublished]
____________
Before WOLLMAN, LOKEN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal, Rowland Zerba challenges the district court1
order revoking his supervised release and imposing a 7-month sentence, followed by
1
The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern
District of Iowa.
2 years of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has submitted
a brief stating that Zerba believes the district court lacked authority to sentence him
to additional supervised release because 18 U.S.C. ยง 3583(h), which specifically
allows for supervised release following revocation and reincarceration, was not in
effect at the time of his initial sentencing.
After careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court had
authority to impose a term of supervised release following a revocation prison term.
See Johnson v. United States,
529 U.S. 694, 713 (2000); United States v. Palmer,
380
F.3d 395, 396-97 (8th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (standard of review). Accordingly, we
grant counsel leave to withdraw, and affirm.
______________________________
-2-