Court Opinion

ID: 9408321
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-12 15:01:50.622175+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:43.251264
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 23-1443
                        ___________________________

                             United States of America

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

                                           v.

                                     Larry Todt

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
                                       ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
               for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
                                   ____________

                              Submitted: July 7, 2023
                               Filed: July 12, 2023
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

     Larry Todt appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and
imposed a term of imprisonment, with no supervised release to follow. His counsel

      1
       The Honorable Matthew T. Schelp, United States District Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri.
has moved to withdraw and filed a brief challenging the substantive reasonableness
of the sentence.

       After reviewing the record under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard of
review, see United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 915-16 (8th Cir. 2009), we
conclude the district court did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence. The
sentence was within the statutory maximums. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). The court
also sufficiently considered the statutory sentencing factors and did not overlook a
relevant factor, give significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or commit
a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See id. § 3583(e); Miller, 557
F.3d at 917; see also United States v. McGhee, 869 F.3d 703, 707 (8th Cir. 2017) (per
curiam). Todt’s disagreement with how the court weighed those factors is insufficient
to show an abuse of discretion on this record. See United States v. Vaca, 38 F.4th
718, 724 (8th Cir. 2022).

      Accordingly, we affirm the judgment and grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                     ______________________________

                                         -2-