Case ID: f-appx_527/html/0595-02.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. Lorenzo DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 13-1543.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 21, 2013.
    Filed: Aug. 27, 2013.
    
      Martin Joseph McLaughlin, Patrick J. Reinert, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lorenzo Diaz, U.S. Penitentiary, Leavenworth, KS, pro se.
    Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

While Lorenzo Diaz was serving a second period of supervised release — after revocation of the first period of supervised release, due to his violation of several release conditions — the district court found that Diaz had again violated his release conditions. The district court revoked supervised release and sentenced Diaz to serve ten months in prison and additional supervised release through March 31, 2019. Diaz appeals, arguing that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to serve ten months in prison, and in particular, that the court improperly balanced the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors in choosing his revocation sentence.

Upon careful review of the record before us, we conclude that the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915— 16 (8th Cir.2009) (standard of review). The court calculated and considered the Guidelines revocation range and applicable statutory limits; assured Diaz that the court had considered all of the section 3553(a) factors; discussed certain section 3553(a) factors, including Diaz’s lengthy criminal history and poor history on supervision; gave detailed reasons for its revocation sentence; and sentenced Diaz within the recommended Guidelines revocation range. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) (permitting revocation of supervised release and re-imprisonment after consideration of specified factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)); United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir.2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to revocation sentence within Guidelines range).

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed, and we grant counsel leave to withdraw. 
      
      . The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.