United States v. Dante Williams
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10737
| 8th Cir. | 2015Background
- Williams pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of a firearm as a previously convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- The district court sentenced him to 37 months’ imprisonment, at the bottom of the advisory guideline range.
- Williams urged a downward variance to probation, citing mitigating factors: stable employment, family support, community involvement, age of prior felonies, and residence in a high-crime area.
- The court denied probation, noting Williams fled from police and possessed a fully loaded gun.
- The court stated the case was run-of-the-mill and that the U.S. Attorney’s office elected federal prosecution; the court said it would follow the guidelines, though viewing them as advisory.
- On appeal, Williams challenged the sentence as substantively unreasonable, arguing improper weighting of offense characteristics and improper consideration of prosecutorial discretion; the panel affirmed the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the district court abuse its discretion in weighting offense factors? | Williams argues weight on offense overshadowed mitigating factors. | Williams contends court ignored mitigating factors and overemphasized offense. | No abuse; within-range, substantial discretion to weigh factors. |
| Did the district court impermissibly rely on prosecutorial discretion of the U.S. Attorney? | Prosecutorial discretion improperly influenced sentencing weight | Court correctly noted prosecution choice, but treated guidelines as advisory | No error; prosecutorial discretion discussion did not render sentence unreasonable. |
| Is the sentence substantively reasonable under the § 3553(a) framework? | Sentence is unreasonable given mitigating factors | Sentence at bottom of advisory range with proper § 3553(a) considerations | Yes; within advisory range and reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Court 2007) (reasonableness review for sentences; deferential standard)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (Supreme Court 2007) (respect for the statutory factors and advisory guidelines)
- United States v. Barron, 557 F.3d 866 (8th Cir. 2009) (presumption of reasonableness when within advisory range)
- United States v. Timberlake, 679 F.3d 1008 (8th Cir. 2012) (district court has substantial latitude in weight given § 3553(a) factors)