United States v. Jermaine Travis
659 F. App'x 368
8th Cir.2016Background
- On June 4, 2014, officers stopped Jermaine Travis for tinted windows, discovered heroin on his person (5.14 g) and in his hotel room (39.92 g), drug paraphernalia, and a loaded handgun; Travis pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute heroin.
- Indicted on three counts but pleaded guilty to count 2 (21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C)); parties agreed base offense level 18 under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 and a two-level firearm enhancement.
- Probation classified Travis as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 based on two prior Wisconsin felony drug convictions (1998 and 2001), which raised his base offense level to 34; acceptance reduced total to offense level 31.
- With criminal-history category VI, Guidelines range was 188–235 months; district court imposed 192 months and expressly upheld the career-offender enhancement.
- Travis argued the 1998 conviction was stale (he was transferred to Illinois in 1999) and both predicates were from his youth and involved small amounts, so the enhancement was procedurally and substantively unreasonable.
- District court found the Dane County (1998) incarceration counted under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(e)(1), considered § 3553(a) factors, and concluded the sentence was sufficient but not greater than necessary; Travis appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether district court procedurally erred by applying career-offender enhancement without adequately considering § 3553(a) mitigating factors | Travis: court failed to adequately consider staleness, youth, and small amounts; thus procedural error | Government: court addressed timing, reviewed PSR, and considered defendant's arguments and § 3553(a) factors | No procedural error; court considered § 3553(a) and explained sentence |
| Whether the 1998 Dane County conviction is counted under U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2(e)(1) | Travis: physical incarceration ended earlier due to transfer, so conviction does not satisfy 15-year rule | Government: incarceration on Dane County conviction lasted until Dec. 4, 1999, falling within 15-year lookback to 2014 offense | Court held the Dane County conviction satisfied § 4A1.2(e)(1) timing requirement |
| Whether the within-Guidelines sentence is substantively unreasonable given stale/remote predicates | Travis: remoteness and youth of predicates make the career-offender enhancement and sentence disproportionate | Government: district court may weigh § 3553(a) factors and gave appropriate weight to recidivism and deterrence | Sentence substantively reasonable; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether district court misapplied Guidelines or made clearly erroneous factual findings | Travis: contends misapplication in counting predicate; challenges factual basis for counting incarceration | Government: court’s factual findings supported by PSR and sentencing hearing | No clear error; application of Guidelines reviewed de novo but factual findings upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. United States, 573 F.3d 639 (8th Cir. 2009) (procedural-error and reasonableness review framework for sentencing)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) (applies reasonableness review and presumption for within-Guidelines sentences)
- Barker v. United States, 556 F.3d 682 (8th Cir. 2009) (review standards: factual findings for clear error, Guidelines application de novo)
- Sandoval-Sianuqui v. United States, 632 F.3d 438 (8th Cir. 2011) (record can show court actually considered § 3553(a) factors)
- Walking Eagle v. United States, 553 F.3d 654 (8th Cir. 2009) (same)
- Fry v. United States, 792 F.3d 884 (8th Cir. 2015) (court need not address every argument or list each § 3553(a) factor)
- Keating v. United States, 579 F.3d 891 (8th Cir. 2009) (presume court considered matters presented when record shows attention)
- Borromeo v. United States, 657 F.3d 754 (8th Cir. 2011) (abuse of discretion standards for substantive-unreasonableness review)
- Feemster v. United States, 572 F.3d 455 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (defines abuse-of-discretion in weighing § 3553(a) factors)
- Bolden v. United States, 596 F.3d 976 (8th Cir. 2010) (defendant bears burden to show sentence should be lower)
- Farmer v. United States, 647 F.3d 1175 (8th Cir. 2011) (district courts have wide latitude in weighing § 3553(a) factors)