Opinion ID: 53170
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Johnston’s Reasonableness Argument

Text: We review the sentence imposed upon revocation of supervised release for reasonableness. United States v. Sweeting, 437 F.3d 1105, 1106-07 (11th Cir. 2006). To the extent that Johnston argues that his sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to consider the § 3553(a) factors, his argument is without merit. If supervised release is revoked under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e), the statute requires that the § 3553(a) factors be considered. United States v. Brown, 224 F.3d 1237, 1241 (11th Cir. 2000) (quoting United States v. Giddings, 37 F.3d 1091, 1095 (5th Cir. 1994)) (emphasis in original). However, when revocation of supervised release is mandatory under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(g), the statute does not require consideration of the § 3553(a) factors.’” Id. The only limitation in § 3583(g) is that the sentence not exceed the statutory maximum authorized under § 3583(e)(3). Here, Johnston’s 22-month sentence was 14 months below the statutory maximum of three years’ imprisonment. In any event, although consideration of the § 3553(a) factors was not required, the record reflects that the district court considered of many of the 7 § 3553(a) factors, including the Chapter 7 guideline range. When the court explained that Johnston was not “seriously abid[ing] by the conditions of supervision and constantly [had] to be monitored,” it demonstrated its consideration of his “history and characteristics” and the nature and circumstances of the violations, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1). Moreover, when the court stated that the sentence must deter Johnston from committing further criminal acts and abusing drugs, it showed its consideration of the need for the sentence imposed “to protect the public from future crimes of the defendant,” “to promote respect for the law,” and “to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct,” see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)(A)-(C). Further, when the court noted that Johnston had received “preferential treatment” in the past, it demonstrated its consideration of his “history and characteristics” and the need to deter future criminal conduct, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (a)(2)(B). In sum, Johnston committed numerous violations of the conditions of his supervised release and has a serious criminal record. The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a sentence that exceeded the recommended Chapter 7 guideline range, and the ultimate sentence was reasonable based on the district court’s consideration of many of the § 3553(a) factors. Accordingly, upon review of the record on appeal and consideration of the parties’ briefs, we discern 8 no reversible error. AFFIRMED. 9