Court Opinion

ID: 9381549
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-23 15:01:12.302732+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:33.305525
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 22-3636
                         ___________________________

                             United States of America,

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

                                           v.

                          Thomas Hannibal Drumgold, II,

                       lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.
                                        ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                    for the District of North Dakota - Western
                                   ____________

                             Submitted: March 17, 2023
                               Filed: March 23, 2023
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before COLLOTON, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

       Thomas Drumgold, II appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised
release and sentenced him to a term of 12 months and 1 day in prison, followed by 24

      1
       The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District
of North Dakota.
months of supervised release. His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief
arguing that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.

       Upon careful review, to conform to the statutory maximum punishment, we
order the judgment amended as follows: Drumgold’s revocation prison sentence
remains 12 months and 1 day, but his term of supervised release will be 24 months
minus 1 day. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h). We affirm the judgment in all other respects.
Drumgold’s sentence was not unreasonable, as there is no indication that the district
court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or
irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant
factors. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-23 (8th Cir. 2006); see also
United States v. Elodio-Benitez, 672 F.3d 584, 586 (8th Cir. 2012). We also grant
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
                        ______________________________

                                         -2-