Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
United States of America v. Terrell Lillybridge
Case Number: 21-1322
Judge: Before BENTON, WOLLMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Court: United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
St. Louis, MO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant with appealing the Guidelines-range sentence the district court imposed upon revoking his supervised release.
Lillybridge’s counsel has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief
challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Miller,
557 F.3d 910, 916 (8th Cir. 2009) (substantive reasonableness of revocation sentence
is reviewed under deferential abuse-of-discretion standard); United States v.
Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 464 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (“it will be the unusual case
when we reverse a district court sentence – whether within, above, or below the
applicable Guidelines range – as substantively unreasonable”). The record reflects
that the district court considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors – including the
evidence Lillybridge offered in mitigation – and imposed a sentence that was within
the Guidelines range and below the statutory limit. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3)
(maximum revocation prison term is 2 years if underlying offense is Class C felony);
United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 922-924 (8th Cir. 2006) (revocation sentence
may be unreasonable if district court fails to consider relevant § 3553(a) factor, gives
significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of
judgment); United States v. Perkins, 526 F.3d 1107, 1110 (8th Cir. 2008) (revocation
sentence within Guidelines range is accorded presumption of substantive
reasonableness on appeal)
Outcome: The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.