Court Opinion

ID: 4217939
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2017-11-06 16:01:39.266509+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:45.495073
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
         For the Eighth Circuit
     ___________________________

             No. 17-1714
     ___________________________

          United States of America

     lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                        v.

           Eldon Philip Anderson

   lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
      ___________________________

             No. 17-3183
     ___________________________

          United States of America

     lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

                        v.

           Eldon Philip Anderson

   lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
                   ____________

 Appeals from United States District Court
  for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
                                  ______________

                            Submitted: October 23, 2017
                             Filed: November 6, 2017
                                  [Unpublished]
                                  ____________

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
                           ____________

PER CURIAM.

       In these consolidated appeals, Eldon Anderson, proceeding pro se, appeals the
district court’s1 order revoking his supervised release, and also appeals the district
court’s2 denial of his motion for release pending appeal. Anderson argues on appeal,
inter alia, that the government failed to prove he violated the terms of his supervised
release.

       After carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we
reject Anderson’s challenge to the district court’s determination that he violated the
terms of his supervised release. See United States v. Black Bear, 542 F.3d 249, 252
(8th Cir. 2008) (finding as to whether violation occurred is reviewed for clear error).
We conclude that Anderson’s additional arguments are also unavailing, and therefore
affirm the judgment revoking his supervised release. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We further
dismiss as moot Anderson’s appeal from the denial of his motion for release pending
appeal, and deny as moot his motion for an expedited appeal.
                        ______________________________

      1
      The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.
      2
      The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.

                                         -2-