Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carl Dean WALKER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-27
Citations: 488 F. App'x 176
Docket Number: No. 12-1528
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carl Dean WALKER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MELLOY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 488
Pages: 176–178

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Carl Dean WALKER, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-1528.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 17, 2012.
Filed: Sept. 27, 2012.
Kyra E. Jenner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, argued, Fort Smith, AR, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Lisa Peters, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Little Rock, AR, Angela Lorene Pitts, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, argued, Fayetteville, AR, for Defendant-Appellant.
Carl Dean Walker, Texarkana, TX, pro se.
Before MELLOY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Carl Dean Walker appeals the district court's reimposition of two special conditions of supervised release following our remand, see United States v. Walker, 450 Fed.Appx. 544 (8th Cir.2011) (remanding for individualized findings with regard to three special conditions of supervised release). Having carefully reviewed the re-sentencing transcript, we find that the two challenged special conditions, regarding sex offender treatment and internet usage, are reasonably related to the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), involve no greater deprivation of liberty than necessary, and are consistent with pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (setting forth the standard for issuing special conditions of supervised release); United States v. Morais, 670 F.3d 889, 895 (8th Cir.2012) (approving analogous provision regarding internet usage); United States v. Poitra, 648 F.3d 884, 888-89 (8th Cir.2011) (approving similar condition regarding sex offender treatment). Further, following our remand, the district court made adequate individualized find ings with regard to the necessity of each condition. Accordingly, we affirm.
. The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.