Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03802/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03802-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Matthew James Morgan
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Missouri.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3802

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Missouri.

Matthew James Morgan, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: September 6, 2005

Filed: September 12, 2005

___________

Before MELLOY, MAGILL, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Morgan pleaded guilty to stealing explosive materials, and was

sentenced to 18 months in prison and 3 years supervised release. See 18 U.S.C.

§§ 844(k) (10-year maximum prison term), 3559(a)(3) (Class C felony), 3583(b)(2)

(3-year maximum supervised release term for Class C felony). At a revocation

hearing several months after his release, Morgan did not deny alleged violations of

the conditions of his release. The district court1

 revoked supervised release and

imposed a new sentence of 4 months imprisonment and 2 years supervised release,

Appellate Case: 04-3802 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/12/2005 Entry ID: 1950455
-2-

commenting on Morgan’s personal circumstances and his numerous violations.

Morgan appeals this sentence.

We note that both the prison term and the supervised release term were within

authorized limits, and that the district court considered appropriate factors in

imposing the revocation sentence. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3583(e)(3) (authorizing up to 2

years imprisonment upon revocation of supervised release where original offense was

Class C felony), 3583(h) (authorizing new period of supervised release not to exceed

maximum term of supervised release for original offense, less any prison time

imposed upon revocation of supervised release). We conclude that Morgan’s

sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825-26 (8th

Cir. 2005) (standard of review). 

Accordingly, we affirm, and we also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3802 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/12/2005 Entry ID: 1950455