United States v. Matt McDermott, 549 F. App'x 586 (8th Cir. 2013). · Go Syfert
Search
United States v. Matt McDermott, 549 F. App'x 586 (8th Cir. 2013). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
Matt McDERMOTT, Defendant-Appellant
17-1060.
Docket on CourtListener (RECAP)
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Dec 23, 2013.
Unpublished opinion
549 F. App'x 586
Douglas Richard Semisch, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Omaha, NE, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Matt Mcdermott, Kearney, NE, pro se.
Loken, Bowman, Gruender.
Unpublished
PER CURIAM.

Matt McDermott directly appeals the order of the district court [1] modifying the terms of his probation. Upon careful review, we reject McDermott’s claim that the district court was biased against him and conclude that his other arguments on appeal lack merit. The district court committed no abuse of discretion. Cf. United States v. Leigh, 276 F.3d 1011, 1012 (8th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (revocation of probation is reviewed for abuse of discretion and requires only enough evidence, within sound judicial discretion, to satisfy district judge that conduct of probationer has not met conditions of probation). [2]

We thus affirm the order of the district court. We also deny McDermott’s pending motion.

1

. The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.

2

. To the extent McDermott has attempted to assert a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, he first did so in his reply brief, and we decline to consider it. See Jenkins v. Winter, 540 F.3d 742, 751 (8th Cir.2008) (“Claims not raised in an opening brief are deemed waived.... This court does not consider issues raised for the first time on appeal in a reply brief.”).