United States v. Pollock Rush, Sr., No. 22-2833 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: [Per Curiam - Before Shepherd, Gras, and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Anders case. The revocation sentence imposed was not an abuse of the district court's discretion. [ January 25, 2023 ]
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 22-2833 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Pollock Gerald Rush, Sr. lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa ____________ Submitted: January 17, 2023 Filed: January 26, 2023 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SHEPHERD, GRASZ, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Pollock Rush, Sr. appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and, in an amended judgment, sentenced him to 24 months in prison, followed by 3 1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. years of supervised release. His counsel moved to withdraw and filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness of the amended revocation sentence. After careful review of the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the amended revocation sentence. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917-18 (8th Cir. 2009) (reviewing substantive reasonableness of revocation sentenced under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard). The record reflects the district court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; 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 the relevant factors, see United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-24 (8th Cir. 2006); and the amended revocation sentence is within the statutory maximum, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (h), (k). 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.
