*1 Before SHEPHERD, STRAS, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

In a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, David Giese argued that counsel was ineffective for failing to seek a downward departure at *2 sentencing for aberrant behavior. See U.S.S.G. § 5K2.20. After denying relief, the district court ^[1] granted a certificate of appealability.

We conclude that this case is now moot because Giese has been released from prison. A ruling here would not affect the supervised-release term he is currently serving, nor are there any collateral consequences from leaving the district court’s order in place. See U.S.S.G. § 5D1.2(a) & cmt. n.4 (recommending supervised- release terms based on statutory factors and the crime’s classification, rather than offense-level and criminal-history calculations under the Sentencing Guidelines); see also Owen v. United States , 930 F.3d 989, 990 (8th Cir. 2019) (holding that release will moot a § 2255 motion when the petitioner “challenge[s] only his term of imprisonment” and not “the term of supervised release”). And, of course, no remedy is available to shorten a term of imprisonment that Giese has already served. See Owen , 930 F.3d at 990 . We accordingly dismiss the appeal.

______________________________

[1] The Honorable Karen E. Schreier, United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota. -2-