United States v. Santos Portillo

1The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, Chief Judge, United States District Court
for the Southern District of Iowa.
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 04-1589
___________
United States of America, *
*
Appellee, *
* Appeal from the United States
v. * District Court for the Southern
* District of Iowa.
Allen Gaines, *
* [UNPUBLISHED]
Appellant. *
___________
Submitted: July 23, 2004
Filed: August 3, 2004
___________
Before MURPHY, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal following revocation of his supervised release, Allen Gaines
seeks reversal on the basis that the district court 1 denied him his right of allocution.
Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that Gaines’s right of
allocution was satisfied. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 32(i)(4); United States v. Patterson,
128 F.3d 1259, 1260-61 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam) (right of allocution applies to

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
supervised-release-revocation hearing). Gaines testified at the hearing before
sentencing, at which time he made his views known regarding the alleged violations,
the progress he had made on supervision, and his desire to be continued on supervised
release without modification. See United States v. Kaniss, 150 F.3d 967, 969 (8th
Cir. 1998); United States v. Iversen, 90 F.3d 1340, 1345-46 (8th Cir. 1996)
(defendant was effectively granted allocution, even though court did not ask her if she
had anything to add regarding sentencing, where she testified on her own behalf such
that her views regarding sentencing were known and it was clear that she knew she
had right to speak on any subject prior to sentencing and availed herself of that right).
Accordingly, we affirm.
______________________________

-- 2 of 2 --