Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Quentin JETTON, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-12-06
Citations: 497 F. App'x 668
Docket Number: No. 12-1621
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Quentin JETTON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before BYE, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 497
Pages: 668–669

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Quentin JETTON, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 12-1621.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Dec. 5, 2012.
Filed: Dec. 6, 2012.
Timothy T. Duax, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Sioux City, IA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Quentin Jetton, Sandstone, MN, pro se. Douglas Lee Roehrich, Sioux City, IA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before BYE, GRUENDER, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Quentin Jetton appeals the sentence that the district court imposed upon revoking his supervised release. His counsel has filed a brief challenging the reasonableness of Jetton's revocation sentence and requesting permission to withdraw.
This court concludes that the district court committed no abuse of discretion, and that Jetton's revocation sentence is not unreasonable. See United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir.2008) (appellate court reviews revocation sentence for abuse of discretion; district court abuses discretion if sentence imposed is unreasonable); see also United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir.2009) (court reviews revocation sentencing decisions using same standards as applied to initial sentencing decisions; first ensuring that district court committed no significant procedural error such as failing to consider relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, and then considering substantive reasonableness of sentence). The district court sentenced Jetton to a prison term below the statutory maximum, and gave sound reasons for its sentencing decision. Cf. United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 924 (8th Cir.2006) (although defendant received maximum sentence available under statute, district court justified its decision by giving excellent supporting reasons, including its grave concern over defendant's numerous and repeated supervised-release violations).
This court grants counsel permission to withdraw, and affirms.
. The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.