United States v. Shahid Pratt, 294 F. App'x 240 (8th Cir. 2008). · Go Syfert
United States v. Shahid Pratt, 294 F. App'x 240 (8th Cir. 2008). 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, Appellee,
v.
Shahid R. PRATT, Appellant
08-1699.
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
Sep 24, 2008.
Unpublished opinion
294 F. App'x 240
Larry C. Pace, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Raymond C. Conrad, Jr., Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant., Rudolph R. Rhodes, IV, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
Melloy, Colloton, Shepherd.
Unpublished

[*241] [UNPUBLISHED]

PER CURIAM.

Shahid Pratt appeals the sentence the district court [1] imposed after revoking his supervised release. We affirm.

We find that the revocation sentence of 14 months in prison is not unreasonable. First, the sentence was within both the statutory limits and the Chapter 7 advisory Guidelines range of 8-14 months. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (authorizing up to 2-year prison term upon revocation of supervised release where original offense was Class C felony); U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a) (range for Grade C violation with Category VI criminal history is 8-14 months in prison). Second, in sentencing Pratt, the district court considered appropriate factors, including Pratt’s history and characteristics, the circumstances of his offense, and the need for deterrence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1)-(2), (a)(4)(B), § 3583(e) (permitting imposition of revocation sentence after consideration of certain § 3553(a) factors); United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir.2006) (district court need not mechanically list every § 3553(a) consideration when sentencing defendant upon revocation of supervised release).

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

1

. The Honorable Nanette K. Laughrey, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.