Case ID: f-appx_405/html/0078-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Orlando STRAW, Appellant.
    No. 10-2991.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Dec. 22, 2010.
    Filed: Dec. 23, 2010.
    Daniel C. Tvedt, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Appellee.
    John P. Messina, Assistant, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Appellant.
    Orlando Straw, Cedar Rapids, IA, pro se.
    Before WOLLMAN, MELLOY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Orlando Straw challenges the sentence the district court imposed after revoking his supervised release. In particular, he challenges (1) the length of his prison term, and (2) a no-contact order imposed as a special condition of his supervised release. Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable term of imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3); United States v. Thunder, 553 F.3d 605, 609 (8th Cir.2009) (revocation sentence above Guidelines range was not substantively unreasonable where defendant repeatedly violated supervised release); United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir.2005) (standard of review). We further conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the no-contact order. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)(1) — (3) (factors for court to consider in ordering special condition of supervised release); United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475, 478 (8th Cir.2010) (standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.