United States v. Keith Nelson, No. 19-1339 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Benton and Grasz, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. Defendant's within-guidelines sentence as substantively reasonable. [ November 13, 2019
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1339 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Keith Nelson lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Davenport ____________ Submitted: November 12, 2019 Filed: November 15, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Keith Nelson appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to 24 months in prison, followed by 24 months of supervised release. 1 The Honorable John A. Jarvey, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. We conclude the revocation sentence is not substantively unreasonable, as the sentence was within the advisory United States Sentencing Guidelines range and the statutory requirements, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (h); the district court stated it had considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and explained its reasons for the decision; and there is no indication the district court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors, see United States v. McGhee, 869 F.3d 703, 705-06 (8th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for abuse of discretion); United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (discussing substantive reasonableness; permitting, on appeal, presumption of reasonableness for Guidelines-range sentence). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and 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.
