United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 22-2114 ___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Gregory Richard Sills,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant. ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids ____________

Submitted: September 30, 2022 Filed: October 27, 2022 [Unpublished] ____________

Before COLLOTON, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Gregory Sills appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and imposed a term of imprisonment, followed by an additional term of supervised

1 The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa. release. His counsel has moved to withdraw and filed a brief challenging the reasonableness of the sentence.

After reviewing the record under a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard, see United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 917 (8th Cir. 2009), we conclude the district court did not impose an unreasonable sentence. The sentence is within the statutory limits, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3), (h); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) (2016), and is presumptively reasonable because it is within the applicable advisory range under the sentencing guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4(a); United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009). The district court sufficiently considered the relevant statutory sentencing factors and did not overlook a relevant factor, give significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or commit a clear error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e); Miller, 557 F.3d at 917; see also United States v. Richart, 662 F.3d 1037, 1054 (8th Cir. 2011). The court’s reasoned decision to impose “a sentence above [the] probation officer’s recommendation does not render [Sills’s] sentence substantively unreasonable.” United States v. Wrice, 834 Fed. Appx. 301, 302 (8th Cir. 2021) (per curiam).

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

-2-