United States v. Carl Walker, No. 12-1528 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. For the court's prior opinion, see U.S. v. Walker, 450 F. App'x 544 (8th Cir. 2011). Challenged special provisions of defendant's supervised release were reasonably related to the sentencing factors in Sec. 3553(a), involved no greater deprivation of liberty than was necessary and were consistent with the Sentencing Commission's policy statements; the conditions were also supported by adequate individualized findings.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 12-1528 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Carl Dean Walker lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs ____________ Submitted: September 17, 2012 Filed: September 27, 2012 [Unpublished] ____________ Before MELLOY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Carl Dean Walker appeals the district court's1 reimposition of two special conditions of supervised release following our remand, see United States v. Walker, 1 The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. 450 F. App'x 544 (8th Cir. 2011) (remanding for individualized findings with regard to three special conditions of supervised release). Having carefully reviewed the resentencing transcript, we find that the two challenged special conditions, regarding sex offender treatment and internet usage, are reasonably related to the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), involve no greater deprivation of liberty than necessary, and are consistent with pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (setting forth the standard for issuing special conditions of supervised release); United States v. Morais, 670 F.3d 889, 895 (8th Cir. 2012) (approving analogous provision regarding internet usage); United States v. Poitra, 648 F.3d 884, 888-89 (8th Cir. 2011) (approving similar condition regarding sex offender treatment). Further, following our remand, the district court made adequate individualized findings with regard to the necessity of each condition. Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ -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.
