United States v. Morgan ( 1995 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-60325
(Summary Calendar)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM EDDIE MORGAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
(1:92-CR-007-S-D)
October 27, 1995
Before GARWOOD, WIENER and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
In his appeal from the order of the district court revoking
supervised release and imposing renewed incarceration, Defendant-
Appellant William Eddie "Bucky" Morgan contends that the government
*
Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions that
have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases on
the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless
expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."
Pursuant to that Rule, the Court has determined that this opinion
should not be published.
failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he had
breached the terms of his supervised release, and that the district
court erred by considering improper factors in imposing sentence
and by departing upwardly. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
I
FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS
Events leading to Morgan's finding himself on supervised
release are not germane to this appeal. It suffices that following
a period of federal incarceration Morgan was serving a three-year
term of supervised release, subject to both standard conditions and
special conditions. The latter included prohibitions from
possessing a firearm and having any contact or communication with
one Brenda Kay Buskirk.
About a year into Morgan's term of supervised release the
government moved to revoke it, alleging various assaults on other
women as well as possession of a firearm and possession of
marijuana. Following the revocation hearing the district court
found that the government had failed to prove the marijuana and
assault allegations by a preponderance of the evidence but had
proved violation of the special firearms condition of his
supervised release.
Based on a determination that the Guidelines did not
adequately cover Morgan's situation, together with evidence of a
nexus between his mental problems and relational problems with
women, the district court determined that an upward departure was
necessary to accommodate a sufficiently long mental treatment to
2
accommodate rehabilitation. The court sentenced Morgan to 24
months' imprisonment and ordered "that he be placed in a facility
which provides for intensive, structured mental health counseling."
Morgan timely appealed, asserting the errors described above.
II
ANALYSIS
"A district court may revoke a defendant's supervised release
if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence that a condition of
release has been violated."1 A decision to revoke supervised
release is reviewed for abuse of discretion.2 We have now
carefully reviewed the record in this matter and the applicable law
as set forth in briefs of counsel and as determined independently.
As a result of this review, we are satisfied that the district
court committed no reversible error. The evidence of Morgan's
firearms possession consisted largely of the testimony of Police
Officer Spradlin and one Becky Morgan, whose testimony the district
court credited. Such evidence is sufficient to meet the
preponderance test and demonstrate that Morgan had violated the
firearms condition of supervised release. The district court did
not abuse its discretion in revoking Morgan's supervised release
based on his violation of the firearms condition.
As noted, Morgan also challenged the district court's upward
departure to achieve a sentence of 24 months' imprisonment. As
1
United States v. McCormick, 54 F.3d 214, 219 (5th Cir.
1995), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. Aug. 21, 1995) (No. 95-
5662).
2
Id.3
that sentence was within the statutory maximum,3 it was not
unlawful. Our review of the district court's reasons for its
sentence shows that the court considered not only Morgan's
rehabilitative needs but also his history of violence and
dysfunctional relationships with women as well as the potential
threat he poses to women. As the court properly considered the
factors in accordance with § 3583(e), the sentence imposed is not
plainly unreasonable.
The court's revocation of Morgan's supervised release and its
imposition of the 24 months' term of imprisonment are, in all
respects,
AFFIRMED.
3
See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3).
4