United States v. Jasper Peneaux, Jr., No. 19-1927 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Per Curiam - Before Loken, Shepherd and Erickson, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Criminal law. Anders case. The district court did not err in finding defendant violated the conditions of his supervised release and did not abuse its discretion by revoking his release. [ December 13, 2019
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 19-1927 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Jasper J. Peneaux, Jr. lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Pierre ____________ Submitted: December 11, 2019 Filed: December 16, 2019 [Unpublished] ____________ Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Jasper Peneaux appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to 2 months in prison and 12 months of supervised release. His 1 The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. counsel has moved for leave to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the revocation. Peneaux has not filed a pro se brief. After careful review of the record, we conclude the district court did not err in finding that Peneaux violated the conditions of his supervised release, or abuse its discretion by revoking Peneaux’s supervised release. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (court may revoke supervised release if it finds by preponderance of evidence that defendant violated condition of supervised release); United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 913-14 (8th Cir. 2009) (this court reviews decision to revoke supervised release for abuse of discretion, and underlying factual findings as to whether a violation occurred for clear error). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and 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.
