United States v. Jeremy Le Travis Martin, 21-11504

On Feb. 22, 2020, Martin was shot at and then posted a Facebook Live vowing revenge against the assailant ("R.R.").
The next day deputies encountered Martin at the apartment complex; he fled, was chased, and was seen reaching toward his waist and throwing an object.
Deputies recovered a loaded Jimenez .380 pistol where Martin had thrown the object; Martin later admitted possession and threatening R.R.
Martin pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2)); PSR calculated offense level 17, criminal-history category V, Guidelines 46–57 months.
At sentencing Martin presented mitigating facts (recent stroke/hospitalization, homelessness, substance use, remorse); the government sought an upward variance based on record and dangerousness.
The district court imposed an 84-month upward-variance sentence (below the 120‑month statutory maximum); Martin appealed, arguing the court undervalued mitigating factors. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing an 84‑month upward variance sentence	District court failed to give sufficient weight to Martin's medical history, recent hospitalization, homelessness, substance use, and remorse	Court properly considered §3553(a) factors and reasonably weighed Martin's prior firearm offenses and dangerousness to justify an upward variance	Affirmed: no abuse of discretion; court considered relevant factors, reasonably weighed criminal history/dangerousness, and sentence was below statutory max

Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (standard of review for sentencing reasonableness and permissible variance analysis)
Pepper v. United States, 562 U.S. 476 (2011) (§3553(a) factors guide individualized sentencing)
United States v. Rosales-Bruno, 789 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2015) (appellant bears burden to show sentence unreasonable; deference to district court)
United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010) (grounds for demonstrating sentencing-abuse of discretion)
United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2016) (deferential review of sentencing variances)
United States v. Moran, 778 F.3d 942 (11th Cir. 2015) (district court may rely on defendant's criminal history even if accounted for in Guidelines)
United States v. Riley, 995 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2021) (upward variance well below statutory maximum supports reasonableness)
United States v. Stanley, 739 F.3d 633 (11th Cir. 2014) (same principle regarding variance and statutory maximum)
United States v. Williams, 456 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2006) (appellate court will not reweigh §3553(a) factors)
United States v. Amedeo, 487 F.3d 823 (11th Cir. 2007) (district court need not expressly address every §3553(a) factor)
United States v. Gonzalez, 550 F.3d 1319 (11th Cir. 2008) (acknowledgment that court considered defendant's arguments suffices)
United States v. Smith, 480 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 2007) (district court may base sentencing findings on PSR and hearing evidence)