From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Simpson

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 4, 2017
No. 16-4498 (8th Cir. Dec. 4, 2017)

Opinion

No. 16-4498

12-04-2017

United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kenneth Robert Simpson Defendant - Appellant


Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis [Unpublished] Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Robert Simpson, proceeding pro se, appeals after the District Court revoked his supervised release for the second time, sentenced him to 18 months in prison, and reimposed a life term of supervised release.

The Honorable Rodney W. Sippel, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. --------

After reviewing the record, we conclude that Simpson's jurisdictional and double-jeopardy arguments amount to collateral attacks on his conviction and sentence, see United States v. Miller, 557 F.3d 910, 913 (8th Cir. 2009) ("A defendant may challenge the validity of his underlying conviction and sentence through a direct appeal or a habeas corpus proceeding, not through a collateral attack in a supervised-release revocation proceeding."), and that his remaining arguments lack merit. Simpson also moves to strike a brief filed by his former counsel. Because Simpson is proceeding pro se, we have not considered the arguments raised in the counseled brief, and we deny as moot the motion to strike.

We affirm the judgment.


Summaries of

United States v. Simpson

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
Dec 4, 2017
No. 16-4498 (8th Cir. Dec. 4, 2017)
Case details for

United States v. Simpson

Case Details

Full title:United States of America Plaintiff - Appellee v. Kenneth Robert Simpson…

Court:United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

Date published: Dec 4, 2017

Citations

No. 16-4498 (8th Cir. Dec. 4, 2017)

Citing Cases

United States v. Simpson

These arguments have been considered and rejected by this court on direct appeals from Simpson’s prior…