Case ID: f-appx_518/html/0034-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Kevin JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 12-2118-cr.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    May 3, 2013.
    Yuanchung Lee, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Defenders of New York, Inc., Appeals Division, New York, NY, for Appellant.
    Christopher J. DiMase, Andrew L. Fish, Assistant United States Attorneys, for Preet Bharara, United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New York, NY, for Appellee.
    PRESENT: RICHARD C. WESLEY, SUSAN L. CARNEY, J. CLIFFORD WALLACE, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The Honorable J. Clifford Wallace, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by designation.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Defendant-Appellant Kevin Johnson appeals from a 51-month sentence that the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Keenan, J.) imposed after Johnson pled guilty to two counts of bank robbery and one count of attempted bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues presented for review.

Johnson argues that the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence. The Pre-sentence Report (“PSR”) concluded that Johnson’s total offense level was 24 and that he faced a 51-63 month sentencing range. The PSR, however, recommended a 30-month sentence because Johnson lacked a criminal history and had certain mental-health issues. After a searching review of the parties’ sentencing submissions, the sentencing transcript, and the arguments on appeal, we do not conclude that the district court abused its discretion in imposing the lowest sentence in the range instead of adopting the significant downward variance that the PSR recommended. See United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180, 187, 189 (2d Cir. 2008)(en banc); see also United States v. Jones, 531 F.3d 163, 174 (2d Cir.2008).

We have considered all of Johnson’s arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the sentence imposed by the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.