Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03571/USCOURTS-ca8-04-03571-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Lawrence Joseph Lapinsky
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3571

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Minnesota.

Lawrence Joseph Lapinsky, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: December 7, 2005

Filed: December 9, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lawrence Lapinsky pleaded guilty in May 1989 to being a felon in possession

of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1); due to prior qualifying convictions,

he received a mandatory minimum 15-year sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), and

3 years supervised release. The offense was therefore a Class C felony. See 18

U.S.C. §§ 922(g), 924(e)(1) (15-year mandatory minimum sentence for violation of

§ 922(g)(1) if defendant has 3 prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug

offenses); 18 U.S.C. § 3559(a)(3) (offense classification). While Lapinsky was

Appellate Case: 04-3571 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/09/2005 Entry ID: 1984287
1

The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of

Minnesota.

-2-

serving the supervised release portion of his sentence, the district court1

 revoked

Lapinsky’s supervised release upon his admission of several violations of his release

conditions, and imposed a new 12-month sentence. Lapinsky now appeals, and his

counsel has moved to withdraw.

Contrary to counsel’s suggestion, a final revocation hearing was held and the

prison term was within authorized limits. Further, the district court considered

appropriate factors in imposing the revocation sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3)

(requiring consideration of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors; authorizing up to 2 years

imprisonment upon revocation of supervised release where original offense is Class

C felony). We conclude that Lapinsky’s sentence is not unreasonable. See United

States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (standard of review).

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

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-3571 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/09/2005 Entry ID: 1984287