Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 09-4146
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern.
Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (5:08-cr-00137-FL-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
April 9, 2010
PER CURIAM:
Frederick Alando Smith pled guilty to bank robbery, 21
U.S.C. 2113(a) (2006), and was sentenced to ninety-five months
in
prison.
Smith
unreasonable.
appeals,
contending
that
his
sentence
is
We affirm.
I
Smiths
base
offense
level
was
20.
See
U.S.
him
in
Smiths total
criminal
history
category
V.
His
advisory
sentencing,
argument
focused
on
the
Governments
be
Government
sentenced
as
observed
that
de
facto
many
of
career
Smiths
offender.
offenses
The
were
too
assault,
passing
communicating
worthless
threats,
2
and
checks
(over
possession
of
twenty
drug
paraphernalia.
category
failed
to
adequately
reflect
the
seriousness
of
sentence
advisory
within
the
Guidelines
range
would
be
hearing
from
counsel
and
inviting
Smith
to
sentencing
factors,
including:
the
nature
and
the
need
commented
included
to
deter
especially
engaging
in
further
about
criminal
Smiths
larceny
over
conduct.
criminal
a
The
court
history,
which
twenty-four-year
period.
the
Government.
The
court
added
that
it
had
considered
However,
dissuaded
the
court
from
sentence.
3
imposing
more
severe
The court commented that it could arrive at a ninetyfive-month sentence another way: by granting the Governments
departure motion.
methodology
set
forth
in
the
Guidelines,
it
would
reach
Guidelines range of 77-96 months and sentence Smith to ninetyfive months in prison.
II
We review a sentence for reasonableness, applying an
abuse-of-discretion standard.
38, 51 (2007); see also
742
(4th
Cir.),
cert.
130
S.
Ct.
127
(2009).
Our
sentence
next
imposed.
the
Id.
substantive
At
this
reasonableness
stage,
we
take
of
into
any
district
variance
court
from
the
decides
Guidelines
to
impose
4
range.
a
sentence
Id.
If
outside
the
the
161
(4th
Cir.),
cert.
denied,
129
S.
Ct.
476
(2008)
variant
sentence
reasonable.
First,
there
Smiths
advisory
was
procedurally
were
no
and
significant
Guidelines
range;
considered
the
the
criminal
nature
and
history,
circumstances
and
the
need
to
of
the
offense,
protect
the
Smiths
public
from
Notably,
and
The
the
court
sentence
district
supported
thoughtful
the
the
court
is
considered
twenty-four-month
analysis
of
discussed
relevant
Smiths
substantively
the
parties
upward
variance
3553(a)
factors.
extensive
history
of
larceny, the harm his crimes had caused, and his demonstrated
lack of respect for the law.
III
Smith contends that his sentence was the result of an
upward
departure
under
the
Guidelines.
See
USSG
4A1.3.
He
sentence
3553(a)
above
Smiths
statutory
advisory
factors;
and
Guidelines
(2)
the
range:
Guidelines
at
variant
164-65.
Under
Evans,
sentence--imposed
because
using
the
we
have
3553(a)
found
Smiths
factors--to
be
the
reasonableness
of
the
alternative rationale.
same
sentence
under
the
IV
We accordingly affirm.