United States v. Jackson, 417 F. App'x 872

Christopher Jackson pleaded guilty to 18 U.S.C. §§ 371, 545, and 2320(a) and was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment with 3 years of supervised release.
After prison, Jackson violated several conditions of his supervised release, including ignoring probation officer orders, admitting to smoking marijuana, and threatening an official at the Georgia Department of Revenue and his probation officer.
The probation office petitioned the district court to revoke Jackson’s supervised release, and at the revocation hearing he stipulated to the violations and attributed the more serious threats to anger management problems.
The district court revoked the supervised release and sentenced Jackson to 21 months’ imprisonment.
Jackson appeals, arguing procedural error for not verifying that he and counsel reviewed the revocation report and that the sentence is substantively unreasonable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rule 32.1 requires verification at revocation hearings.	Rule 32 governs sentencing verification; Rule 32.1 applies to revocation hearings.	Rule 32.1 does not require verification or a revocation report; no such report is required.	No error; Rule 32.1 does not apply to revocation hearings.
Whether the 21-month revocation sentence is procedurally reasonable.	Appeals to anger-management issues and need for alternative treatment.	Judge considered arguments and there was no basis to reduce sentence; anger-management needs addressed while imprisoned.	No procedural error; district court did not err in revoking and imposing 21 months.
Whether the 21-month sentence is substantively reasonable.	Sentence fails to address root cause (anger management) and should be lenient or include anger-management treatment.	Court properly weighed § 3553(a) factors and did not abuse discretion.	Sentence within range and not an abuse of discretion.

United States v. Sweeting, 437 F.3d 1105 (11th Cir. 2006) (reasonableness review for revocation sentences; procedural checks matter)
United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179 (11th Cir. 2008) (procedural error vs. substantive reasonableness framework)
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court 2007) (establishes factors for reasonable sentences)
United States v. Woods, 127 F.3d 990 (11th Cir. 1997) (revocation of probation constitutes part of original sentence)
United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739 (11th Cir. 2008) (within-Guidelines sentence presumed reasonable but totality must be considered)
United States v. Aguillard, 217 F.3d 1319 (5th Cir. 2000) (plain-error review for newly raised issues on appeal)