United States v. Robert Bolden

United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-2842
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the
v. * Northern District of Iowa.
*
Robert Orlando Bolden, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: April 14, 2010
Filed: April 19, 2010
___________
Before LOKEN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Robert Bolden challenges the reasonableness of the sentence the district court1
imposed after revoking his supervised release. Upon careful review, we hold that the
district court did not clearly err in finding by a preponderance of the evidence that
Bolden had violated the conditions of his supervised release, see United States v.
Carothers, 337 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2003) (government must prove by
1
The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Northern District of Iowa.
preponderance of evidence that defendant violated supervised release condition;
district court’s finding that violation occurred is reviewed for clear error; district
court’s credibility determinations at supervised release revocation hearing are virtually
unreviewable on appeal), and we conclude that the revocation sentence is not
unreasonable, see United States v. Tyson, 413 F.3d 824, 825 (8th Cir. 2005) (per
curiam) (revocation sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness in accordance with
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005)).
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We grant counsel’s
motion to withdraw, subject to counsel informing Bolden about procedures for
seeking rehearing or filing a petition for certiorari.
______________________________
-2-