United States v. Terrell Lillybridge, No. 21-1322 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Benton, Wollman, and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The sentence imposed upon the revocation of defendant's supervised release was not substantively unreasonable. [ June 25, 2021 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1322 ___________________________ United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Terrell Devon Lillybridge Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________ Submitted: June 21, 2021 Filed: June 28, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BENTON, WOLLMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Terrell Devon Lillybridge appeals the Guidelines-range sentence the district court1 imposed upon revoking his supervised release. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. 1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. Lillybridge’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 916 (8th Cir. 2009) (substantive reasonableness of revocation sentence is reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (“it will be the unusual case when we reverse a district court sentence – whether within, above, or below the applicable Guidelines range – as substantively unreasonable”). The record reflects that the district court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors – including the evidence Lillybridge offered in mitigation – and imposed a sentence that was within the Guidelines range and below the statutory limit. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (maximum revocation prison term is 2 years if underlying offense is Class C felony); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-924 (8th Cir. 2006) (revocation sentence may be unreasonable if district court fails to consider relevant § 3553(a) factor, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment); United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir. 2008) (revocation sentence within Guidelines range is accorded presumption of substantive reasonableness on appeal). The judgment is affirmed. 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.
