United States v. Allen Gaines ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 04-1589
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 * District Court for the Southern
    * District of Iowa.
    Allen Gaines,                            *
    * [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: July 23, 2004
    Filed: August 3, 2004
    ___________
    Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    In this appeal following revocation of his supervised release, Allen Gaines
    seeks reversal on the basis that the district court1 denied him his right of allocution.
    Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Gaines’s right of
    allocution was satisfied. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(4); United States v. Patterson,
    
    128 F.3d 1259
    , 1260-61 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (right of allocution applies to
    1
    The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, Chief Judge, United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Iowa.
    supervised-release-revocation hearing). Gaines testified at the hearing before
    sentencing, at which time he made his views known regarding the alleged violations,
    the progress he had made on supervision, and his desire to be continued on supervised
    release without modification. See United States v. Kaniss, 
    150 F.3d 967
    , 969 (8th
    Cir. 1998); United States v. Iversen, 
    90 F.3d 1340
    , 1345-46 (8th Cir. 1996)
    (defendant was effectively granted allocution, even though court did not ask her if she
    had anything to add regarding sentencing, where she testified on her own behalf such
    that her views regarding sentencing were known and it was clear that she knew she
    had right to speak on any subject prior to sentencing and availed herself of that right).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-1589

Judges: Murphy, Fagg, Smith

Filed Date: 8/3/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024