United States v. Cedric McDonald

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 24-3287 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee v. Cedric McDonald lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa ____________ Submitted: April 9, 2025 Filed: April 23, 2025 [Unpublished] ____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM.

Cedric McDonald appeals after the district court1 revoked his supervised release and sentenced him to a prison term of 14 months, with no supervised release to follow. His counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief challenging the sentence as substantively unreasonable. McDonald has filed a pro se brief challenging the constitutionality of his sentence.

After reviewing the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the sentence. See United States v. Valure, 835 F.3d 789, 790 (8th Cir. 2016) (reviewing revocation sentence for abuse of discretion). The court considered the relevant factors and did not give significant weight to an improper factor or commit a clear error in weighing the factors. See United States v. Larison, 432 F.3d 921, 923-24 (8th Cir. 2006). The sentence was also statutorily permissible. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). We further conclude McDonald’s pro se arguments are without merit. See United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543, 549 (8th Cir. 2005) (en banc) (errors not properly preserved are reviewed only for plain error). Accordingly, we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw, and affirm.

______________________________