United States v. Timothy Postley, 663 F. App'x 484

Postley was arrested after Mali reported he kicked in her apartment door, slapped and choked her; she said they had broken up and he did not live there. Police arrested Postley at the scene; he admitted the assault but denied burglary. He was on supervised release at the time.
At the revocation hearing Postley admitted several Grade C supervised-release violations (substance-testing noncompliance, refusing program costs) but disputed the Grade A allegation of second‑degree burglary.
Postley’s mother and sister testified he often stayed at Mali’s apartment and had a key; the mother acknowledged a key was not on his key ring when she retrieved his belongings.
The probation officer testified Postley had reported living with his mother, admitted Mali was an ex‑girlfriend, and that jail calls showed Mali referring to being evicted (not “they”) and asking Postley to go home; Postley asked Mali in calls to drop burglary charges.
The district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Postley lacked a right, license, or privilege to enter Mali’s apartment (citing his admissions, Mali’s statements, and the need to kick the door down), revoked supervised release, and sentenced him to 30 months (within a 27–33 month advisory range).
The Eighth Circuit affirmed, concluding the district court’s credibility-based factual findings were not clearly erroneous and that the sentence was not an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Postley committed second‑degree burglary under Iowa law	Postley: He had a right, license, or privilege to enter Mali’s apartment (they lived together/or he had permission), so no burglary	Government: Evidence shows relationship had ended, he did not live there, permission had expired, and he forced entry and assaulted Mali	Court: Affirmed burglary finding; permission had expired and district court’s credibility determinations were not clearly erroneous
Whether district court clearly erred by crediting government witnesses over Postley’s family	Postley: Family testimony showed ongoing access and a key; district court should have credited them	Government: Multiple objective indicia and Postley’s own admissions corroborate Mali and probation officer, undermining family testimony	Court: Credibility is for the factfinder; district court reasonably discounted family testimony; no clear error
Whether sentencing on revocation was an abuse of discretion given burglary finding	Postley: Sentence relied on erroneous Grade A burglary finding, so 30‑month term was abusive	Government: Burglary was proven; sentence within the advisory range presumptively reasonable	Court: No abuse of discretion; sentence within advisory range and defendant bore burden to rebut presumption

United States v. Rhone, 647 F.3d 777 (8th Cir.) (standard of review for factual findings on revocation)
United States v. Cates, 613 F.3d 856 (8th Cir.) (credibility determinations are virtually unassailable on appeal)
United States v. Bolden, 596 F.3d 976 (8th Cir.) (credibility deferential review)
United States v. Growden, 663 F.3d 982 (8th Cir.) (revocation sentence reviewed for substantive reasonableness)
United States v. Scales, 735 F.3d 1048 (8th Cir.) (presumption of reasonableness for within‑guideline sentences)
United States v. Goodale, 738 F.3d 917 (8th Cir.) (defendant bears burden to rebut presumption of reasonableness)
United States v. Jones, 254 F.3d 692 (8th Cir.) (when factual findings are not internally inconsistent or contradicted by objective evidence, they are not clearly erroneous)
State v. Hagedorn, 679 N.W.2d 666 (Iowa 2004) (possession/occupancy factors indicating expired right to enter a residence)