Case Explained: United States of America v. Timothy Paul Cota, Jr

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-13 The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s above-Guidelines-range sentence imposed upon Timothy Cota Jr.’s second revocation of supervised release. The court applied a plain-error standard of review to Cota’s claim that the district court erred by relying on facts from two disputed violation reports when varying upward, noting that even assuming Cota did not waive his objections, he failed to meet the “formidable” burden required for such relief. The court held that the district court did not plainly err in considering Cota’s relationship with his probation officer because it explicitly relied on a government argument citing a report to which Cota had not objected. Furthermore, the court found no clear or obvious error regarding the reference to an Arkansas arrest, as the Guidelines range was calculated solely based on stipulated violations and the mention of the arrest served only as a contextual warning against future violations rather than a basis for the sentence. Additionally, Cota failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that his sentence would have been lighter absent any alleged procedural error. Consequently, the judgment of the district court is affirmed. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.