Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03262/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03262-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jeffrey Glenn Holt
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern

District of Iowa. 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3262

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Northern 

* District of Iowa. 

Jeffrey Glenn Holt, *

* [UNPUBLISHED] 

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 17, 2006

Filed: May 22, 2006

___________

Before MURPHY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. 

___________

PER CURIAM. 

After Jeffrey Glenn Holt committed numerous violations of the terms of his

supervised release, the district court1

 revoked his release and sentenced him to

fourteen months imprisonment followed by supervised release, which included the

special condition that Holt spend up to 180 days in a community corrections center.

Holt appeals, alleging that the district court imposed the halfway house term without

explaining why it was appropriate, that the record does not support the condition, and

Appellate Case: 05-3262 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2006 Entry ID: 2047188
2

that it effectively adds six months to his term of imprisonment and is a greater

deprivation of his liberty than is reasonably necessary in violation of 18 U.S.C. §

3583(d)(2). 

At the revocation hearing on August 10, 2005, Holt admitted that he had

violated the terms of his release on more than twenty occasions and that he was having

difficulty readjusting to society after serving the 120 month sentence imposed for his

earlier drug offense. The district court commented that Holt had a criminal history

category of III and a serious substance abuse problem. It also noted that he had not

complied with urinary analysis requirements, that he had used alcohol, that he had not

notified the Probation Office of his multiple contacts with law enforcement, and that

he had failed to file the monthly report. After further discussion of the 18 U.S.C. §

3553(a) factors, the court imposed the revocation sentence. Holt raised no objection

to the special condition at the time.

We review conditions of supervised release to which a defendant did not object

for plain error, see United States v. Henkel, 358 F.3d 1013, 1014-1015 (8th Cir.

2004), and we recognize the wide discretion given to district courts in imposing

supervised release. United States v. Crose, 284 F.3d 911, 912 (8th Cir. 2002). We

conclude that based on Holt's criminal history, his drug and alcohol problems, and his

admitted difficulty readjusting to society, the district court imposed the least

restrictive means to allow close monitoring, help Holt maintain his sobriety, and

prevent future crime. The district court explained its reasons for the revocation

sentence and did not abuse its discretion by including the halfway house condition.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3262 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2006 Entry ID: 2047188