Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cheryl Y. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-24
Citations: 530 F. App'x 611
Docket Number: No. 13-1484
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cheryl Y. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 530
Pages: 611–612

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cheryl Y. ANDERSON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 13-1484.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Sept. 19, 2013.
Filed: Sept. 24, 2013.
Laine Cardarella, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.
Jane Pansing Brown, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO (Tammy Dickinson, U.S. Atty., on the brief), for appellee.
Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Cheryl Anderson appeals the sentence the district court imposed upon revoking her probation. She argues only that the district court committed procedural error by selecting a sentence based on "clearly erroneous facts." After careful review, we conclude that the district court based its sentencing decision on appropriate considerations and that no abuse of discretion occurred. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 919, 922 (8th Cir.2009) (appellate court reviews probation revocation sentence for abuse of discretion, using same standards as those applied to initial sentencing decisions). Accordingly, we affirm.
. The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.