United States v. Noel Silva
671 F. App'x 94
| 4th Cir. | 2016Background
- Defendant Noel Barrera Silva pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
- The district court imposed a 78-month sentence, which was below the Sentencing Guidelines range.
- Silva appealed, arguing the sentence was substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to consider all 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and did not depart sufficiently from the Guidelines.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed the sentence for substantive reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard and applied a presumption of reasonableness to a sentence below a properly calculated Guidelines range.
- The Fourth Circuit concluded the district court had provided a reasoned basis and sufficiently considered the relevant § 3553(a) factors and therefore affirmed the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Silva's 78-month below-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable | Silva: sentence is greater than necessary; district court failed to consider all § 3553(a) factors and didn’t depart low enough | Government: district court considered relevant § 3553(a) factors, explained its reasoning, and has discretion in sentencing variances | Affirmed: below-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable; Silva failed to rebut presumption of reasonableness |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Yooho Weon, 722 F.3d 583 (4th Cir. 2013) (describes deferential abuse-of-discretion standard for substantive reasonableness)
- United States v. Morace, 594 F.3d 340 (4th Cir. 2010) (court considers totality of circumstances and extent of variance when reviewing reasonableness)
- United States v. Susi, 674 F.3d 278 (4th Cir. 2012) (presumption of reasonableness for sentences within or below a properly calculated Guidelines range)
- United States v. Diosdado-Star, 630 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2011) (district court has flexibility in crafting sentences outside the Guidelines and need only provide enough explanation to show consideration of arguments)
- United States v. Johnson, 445 F.3d 339 (4th Cir. 2006) (district court must consider statutory factors and explain its sentence but need not explicitly reference every § 3553(a) factor)