Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01314/USCOURTS-ca8-07-01314-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christopher Alan Becker
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Charles B. Kornmann, United States District Judge for the

District of South Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1314

___________

United States, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of South Dakota.

Christopher Alan Becker, also known *

as Christopher Stranger Horse, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: November 7, 2007

Filed: November 14, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Christopher Becker challenges the 135-month within-Guidelines sentence the

district court1

 imposed following his guilty plea to conspiring to distribute and possess

with the intent to distribute a substance containing 50 grams or more of a detectable

amount of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846.

Appellate Case: 07-1314 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/14/2007 Entry ID: 3372623
-2-

On appeal, Becker argues that the district court believed the applicable

Guidelines range was unreasonably high due to the inclusion of juvenile convictions

in the criminal history computation, but declined to reduce his sentence because it

mistakenly thought the Guidelines were mandatory, thus resulting in an unreasonable

sentence.

Contrary to Becker’s assertion, the record shows that the district court was

aware of the advisory nature of the Guidelines. At the change-of-plea hearing, the

court specifically informed Becker that the Guidelines were advisory and no longer

mandatory.

Further, upon careful review, we conclude that the court did not abuse its

discretion in sentencing Becker to the bottom of his Guidelines range, even if the court

disagreed with the policy of using juvenile convictions in determining a defendant’s

criminal history category. See Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462 (2007)

(presumption of reasonableness for sentence within advisory Guidelines range);

United States v. Garlewicz, 493 F.3d 933, 938 (8th Cir. 2007) (same); United States

v. Lee, 454 F.3d 836, 838 (8th Cir. 2006) (sentence is reviewed for abuse of

discretion, which occurs if court fails to consider relevant factor that should have

received significant weight, gives significant weight to improper or irrelevant factor,

or considers only appropriate factors but commits clear error of judgment); see also

United States v. Gentile, 473 F.3d 888, 892 (8th Cir. 2007) (“Although the sentencing

guidelines are advisory and district courts are free to fashion sentences that fall

outside the guideline range where individual circumstances warrant, disagreement

with a policy enunciated by the Sentencing Commission is not a proper factor upon

which to base a variance.”), petitions for cert. filed, (U.S. Jul. 18, 2007 & Jul. 30,

2007) (Nos. 07-5589, 07-5761).

 

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-1314 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/14/2007 Entry ID: 3372623