458 F. App'x 428
5th Cir.2012Background
- Carthen was arrested after a June 6, 2009 armed carjacking in Lansing, Michigan, involving victim McConnell who was forced into the trunk and later escaped.
- Police linked Carthen to the Chrysler Sebring used in the carjacking after a July 2009 report by Tett-Davis and subsequent police discovery of the car and Carthen nearby.
- A .38 revolver was found in Carthen's bedroom closet after a search of his mother's home; Carthen claimed the revolver and car belonged to a friend but later admitted involvement.
- Carthen admitted at various times to different accounts of the carjacking; proffer-protected polygraph and later statements established his active role in the carjacking and possession of the revolver.
- The Presentence Report calculated offense level 21, criminal history VI, yielding a guideline range of 77–96 months; upward departures/variances were discussed but not used, and a 96-month sentence was imposed at sentencing.
- The district court stated it would promote sentencing goals under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and considered Carthen’s medical and personal history but declined downward variance or below-guideline sentence, ultimately sentencing within the advisory range.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Substantive reasonableness of a within-range sentence | Carthen argues 96 months is too high given § 3553(a) factors | Carthen contends his medical/mental health issues warrant a below-range sentence | Sentence within range affirmed as reasonable |
| Treatment of medical history under § 3553(a)(2)(D) | District court failed to account for medical needs needing care | Court considered medical evidence but refused to vary downward | No abuse of discretion; court reasonably addressed medical concerns |
| Prosecutorial charging decision under Equal Protection | Federal charges (felon-in-possession) were unjust compared to Michigan penalties | Charging decisions rest with prosecutors; disparity alone not unlawful | Charging decision appropriate; no Equal Protection violation |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Simmons, 587 F.3d 348 (6th Cir.2009) (standard for substantive-reasonableness review; within-range presumption)
- United States v. Borho, 485 F.3d 904 (6th Cir.2007) (abuse-of-discretion review; § 3553(a) factors considered)
- United States v. Collington, 461 F.3d 805 (6th Cir.2006) (reasonableness review when within-range sentence)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (2007) (presumption of reasonableness for properly calculated sentences)
- United States v. Vonner, 516 F.3d 382 (6th Cir.2008) (en banc; double-dip consideration of guidelines)
- United States v. Trejo-Martinez, 481 F.3d 409 (6th Cir.2007) (within-range sentences receive heightened review)
- United States v. McGee, 494 F.3d 551 (6th Cir.2007) (support for presumptive reasonableness of within-range sentence)
- United States v. Clark, 469 F.3d 568 (6th Cir.2006) (medical-condition considerations in sentencing)
- United States v. Dexta, 470 F.3d 612 (6th Cir.2006) (framework for evaluating § 3553(a) factors and reasonableness)