Case ID: f-appx_556/html/0573-01.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, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Michael R. PETREIKIS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-3317.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: May 23, 2014.
    Filed: May 30, 2014.
    Nathan Paul Petterson, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Plaintiff-Ap-pellee.
    Katherine M. Menendez, Assistant, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Michael R. Petreikis, Elk River, MN, pro se.
    Before RILEY, Chief Judge, MELLOY and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Michael R. Petreikis appeals the twelvemonth prison sentence the district court imposed upon' revoking his supervised release for the second time. See United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 825 (8th Cir.2009) (affirming Petreikis’s first revocation sentence). Petreikis argues his sentence “was greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of sentencing, and was therefore unreasonable.” In Petreikis’s view, the district court “failed to give adequate weight to important factors,” including Petreikis’s advanced age, failing health, efforts to improve the circumstances of his supervised release before absconding, and the lack of “evidence that he committed any new offenses” “[d]uring his absence from supervision.” Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court properly considered the relevant sentencing factors, see 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a), 3583(e)(3), and did not impose an unreasonable revocation sentence. See United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110-11 (8th Cir.2008); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923-24 (8th Cir.2006).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B(1), (4). 
      
      . The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.