United States v. Scott Brocail, No. 09-2970 (8th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Sentence imposed upon revocation of defendant's supervised release was not unreasonable.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 09-2970 ___________ United States of America, Appellee, v. Scott Brocail, Appellant. * * * * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the * Western District of Arkansas. * * [UNPUBLISHED] * ___________ Submitted: January 15, 2010 Filed: January 25, 2010 ___________ Before WOLLMAN, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. In this appeal following revocation of his supervised release, Scott Brocail challenges the district court s1 revocation sentence, arguing that it is unreasonable and does not reflect proper consideration of the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Upon careful review, we conclude that the revocation sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (per curiam) (standard of review). The sentence is within the statutory limits of 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) and the range recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines, see United States v. Perkins, 526 1 The Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas. F.3d 1107, 1110 (revocation sentence within Guidelines range is accorded presumption of substantive reasonableness on appeal), and the record reflects that the district court considered and applied appropriate section 3553(a) factors, see id. (district court need not make specific findings on § 3553(a) factors). Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw. ______________________________ -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
