Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03579/USCOURTS-ca8-03-03579-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Matthew Sanders
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. 03-3579

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa

Matthew Sanders, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: May 7, 2004

Filed: May 18, 2004

___________

Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Matthew Sanders appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court1

for the Northern District of Iowa upon revocation of his supervised release. The

district court sentenced Sanders to 12 months imprisonment followed by continuation

of his supervised release until its original expiration date. For reversal, Sanders

argues that the district court abused its discretion in revoking his supervised release

and sentencing him to 12 months imprisonment. For the reasons discussed below, we

affirm the judgment of the district court.

Appellate Case: 03-3579 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/18/2004 Entry ID: 1768170 
-2-

In June 2002, Sanders pleaded guilty to bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§ 2113(a), and was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised

release. Sanders commenced supervised release in January 2003. In September 2003,

the government petitioned for revocation based on Sanders’s problematic behavior

at community-treatment facilities, unauthorized travel out of the judicial district,

marijuana use, multiple failures to report for drug testing and to provide timely

monthly reports to his parole officer, and attempt to buy gas by writing a check

without having sufficient funds to cover the purchase--all of which Sanders admitted.

We reject Sanders’s arguments on appeal. The revocation of supervised release

was not an abuse of discretion, because Sanders admitted that he had used marijuana

and had failed to report for drug testing. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (g); United

States v. Shaw, 180 F.3d 920, 923 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (standard of review).

The length of Sanders’s sentence was also not an abuse of discretion, because

although the 12-month prison term exceeded the Guidelines recommendation under

U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a), the policy statements in Chapter 7 of the Guidelines are not

binding on the district court. See United States v. Holmes, 283 F.3d 966, 968 (8th

Cir. 2002); United States v. Brown, 203 F.3d 557, 558 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam).

Furthermore, his sentence does not exceed the 2-year statutory maximum revocation

prison term for Class C felonies under § 3583(e)(3), see 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a)

(20-year maximum for bank robbery), 3559(a)(3); and the court both considered the

§ 3553(a) factors and explained its sentencing decision, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3).

Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Sanders’s motion for new counsel, and

note any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel that Sanders intended to raise is

not properly before us. See United States v. Martin, 59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir. 1995).

Finally, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 03-3579 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/18/2004 Entry ID: 1768170