United States v. Maurice Malone, No. 16-1848 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam. Before Smith, Benton, and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - revocation of supervised release. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a within-Guidelines range sentence upon revocation of supervised release. [ October 18, 2016
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 16-1848 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Maurice Malone, also known as Tito lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque ____________ Submitted: October 14, 2016 Filed: October 19, 2016 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Maurice Malone appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after revoking his supervised release. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. 1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. The district court did not abuse its discretion. See United States v. Merrival, 521 F.3d 889, 890 (8th Cir. 2008) (substantive reasonableness of revocation sentence is reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard). The within-Guidelinesrange sentence was not substantively unreasonable, and the court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to revocation sentence within Guidelines range); United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009) (under substantive-reasonableness test, district court abuses its discretion if it fails to consider relevant § 3553(a) factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing factors). The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted. ______________________________ -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.
