United States v. Jerome Davis Kent, No. 21-1885 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Erickson, Grasz, and Stras, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The sentence imposed upon the revocation of defendant's supervised release was not substantively unreasonable. [ September 16, 2021 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 21-1885 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Jerome Davis Kent lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of South Dakota - Southern ____________ Submitted: September 14, 2021 Filed: September 17, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________ Before ERICKSON, GRASZ, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Jerome Davis Kent appeals a 16-month sentence he received for violating the conditions of supervised release. Although the sentence was reduced to 7 months after the district court 1 credited him with time served, he still says it is too long. 1 The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. We conclude that the sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009) (reviewing the reasonableness of a revocation sentence for an abuse of discretion); United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir. 2008) (stating that a within-Guidelines-range sentence is presumptively reasonable). The record establishes that the district court sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors, 18 U.S.C. ยงยง 3553(a), 3583(e)(3), and did not rely on an improper factor or commit a clear error of judgment. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923-24 (8th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and grant counsel permission to withdraw. ______________________________ -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.
