United States v. Carl Walker , 488 F. App'x 176 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                  United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 12-1528
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Carl Dean Walker
    lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Western District of Arkansas - Hot Springs
    ____________
    Submitted: September 17, 2012
    Filed: September 27, 2012
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before MELLOY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Carl Dean Walker appeals the district court's1 reimposition of two special
    conditions of supervised release following our remand, see United States v. Walker,
    1
    The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the
    Western District of Arkansas.
    
    450 F. App'x 544
     (8th Cir. 2011) (remanding for individualized findings with regard
    to three special conditions of supervised release). Having carefully reviewed the re-
    sentencing transcript, we find that the two challenged special conditions, regarding
    sex offender treatment and internet usage, are reasonably related to the sentencing
    factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), involve no greater deprivation of liberty than
    necessary, and are consistent with pertinent policy statements issued by the
    Sentencing Commission. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (setting forth the standard for
    issuing special conditions of supervised release); United States v. Morais, 
    670 F.3d 889
    , 895 (8th Cir. 2012) (approving analogous provision regarding internet usage);
    United States v. Poitra, 
    648 F.3d 884
    , 888-89 (8th Cir. 2011) (approving similar
    condition regarding sex offender treatment). Further, following our remand, the
    district court made adequate individualized findings with regard to the necessity of
    each condition. Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 12-1528

Citation Numbers: 488 F. App'x 176

Judges: Beam, Benton, Melloy, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 9/27/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023