Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bernard EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-03-08
Citations: 637 F. App'x 969
Docket Number: No. 15-3014
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bernard EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 637
Pages: 969–969

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Bernard EDWARDS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 15-3014.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: March 3, 2016.
Filed: March 8, 2016.
Ravi T. Narayan, Assistant U.S. Attorney. U.S. Attorney’s Office, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Bernard Edwards, Greenville, IL, pro se.
Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Bernard Edwards directly appeals the district court's judgment revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to 11 months in prison. On appeal, counsel argues that the court imposed an unreasonable sentence, as it failed to give sufficient weight to several mitigating circumstances.
After careful review, this court affirms. See United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir.2009) (this court reviews revocation sentence for abuse of discretion, first reviewing .for significant procedural error, and then considering substantive reasonableness). The district court identified the relevant sentencing factors; explained its reasons for the sentence with specific reference to some of those factors, including the nature of the violations and Edwards's history and characteristics; and did not commit a clear error of judgment. See id. at 917 (outlining substantive-reasonableness test); see also United States v. Hum, 766 F.3d 925, 927-28 (8th Cir. 2014) (per curiam) (rejecting argument that district court failed to adequately consider § 3553(a) factors, as court properly considered defendant's history and noncompliance on supervision, and need to deter and maintain respect for court's directives).
The judgment is affirmed. Counsel's motion to withdraw is granted.
. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.