Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01257/USCOURTS-ca8-06-01257-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Lonnie Youngbear
Appellant

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. 06-1257

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of South Dakota.

Lonnie Youngbear, also known as *

Alex Little Bear, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Defendant-Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 13, 2006

Filed: June 21, 2006 

___________

Before BYE, LAY, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Lonnie Youngbear, aka Alex Little Bear, pled guilty to sexual abuse of a minor

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2242(2). Although the presentence report recommended

an applicable guideline sentencing range of 151 to 188 months’ imprisonment, the

district court1

 sentenced Youngbear to a term of 220 months’ imprisonment.

Youngbear appeals, arguing the sentence is unreasonable. We affirm.

Appellate Case: 06-1257 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2006 Entry ID: 2058979
-2-

Youngbear was originally charged with four counts of sexual contact with three

different children, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2244(a)(1), (2) and 2241(c), and one

count of sexual abuse of a minor who was incapable of consenting, in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 2242(2). Pursuant to a plea agreement, Youngbear pled guilty to one count

of sexual abuse of a minor incapable of consenting and the government dismissed the

remaining counts. In arriving at a recommended sentencing range of 151 to 188

months under the advisory federal sentencing guidelines, the United States Probation

Office calculated a total offense level of 29 and a criminal history category of VI.

The district court ultimately sentenced Youngbear to 220 months’ incarceration.

The court characterized Youngbear’s criminal history as “terrible” and “very

disturbing.” Youngbear has been convicted of a broad range of offenses during his

adult life, including third degree theft (two separate times), second degree theft (two

separate times), assault causing injury, three counts of burglary, felony escape, driving

while intoxicated, simple assault, and felony failure to appear. Not all of these

offenses were included in the calculation of Youngbear’s criminal history category.

Youngbear also had his probation or parole revoked on numerous occasions and

committed offenses while on probation or parole. In discussing Youngbear’s criminal

history, the court noted, “Every time he’s gone into custody, he has come out of

custody and has immediately started engaging in other illegal conduct.” In addition,

the district court looked at the dismissed charges alleging sexual abuse of other

children and was “disturbed about whether or not [Youngbear is] a chronic

pedophile.” The court noted it was “authorized to take into account dismissed charges

in deciding what sentence to impose here.”

After noting that it was required to take into account the advisory guidelines

and the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553, the district court concluded

that Youngbear’s criminal history category was not adequate because it did not take

into account the likelihood that he would commit other crimes. In its written

statement of reasons for the sentence, the district court explained:

Appellate Case: 06-1257 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2006 Entry ID: 2058979
-3-

The Court departed upward in this case pursuant to USSG §4A1.3,

Inadequacy of Criminal History. The Court determined the likelihood

the defendant will commit other crimes was high, as every time he was

released from custody in the past, he committed crimes. There were

several criminal convictions which were not taken into account when the

defendant’s criminal history category was figured. Although, the

defendant’s criminal history category was a level VI, the Court moved

incrementally down the sentencing table to level 31 in criminal history

category VI when he fashioned the sentence for this case. The Court

also took into account dismissed charges of sexual abuse of children.

The defendant is very dangerous, especially to children.

Youngbear argues the district court’s upward departure from the guidelines was

unreasonable and that the district court failed to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

We review a decision to depart upward under the advisory guidelines for an abuse of

discretion. United States v. Mashek, 406 F.3d 1012, 1017 (8th Cir. 2005). The

resulting sentence is reviewed for reasonableness. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.

220, 264 (2005). 

The district court determined the applicable guideline range and considered

several appropriate factors in arriving at its conclusion that an upward departure was

warranted under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines § 4A1.3. “Our cases recognize that even

when a defendant scores sufficient criminal history points to place him in category VI,

the district court may depart upward on the ground that even the highest category

seriously under-represents the seriousness of the defendant’s criminal history.” United

States v. Shannon, 414 F.3d 921, 923 (8th Cir. 2005). Youngbear had several prior

convictions that were not used to calculate his criminal history. Moreover, the district

court noted Youngbear committed crimes “every time he was released from custody.”

See United States v. Schwalk, 412 F.3d 929, 933 (8th Cir. 2005) (“[E]ven offenses

which are minor and dissimilar to the instant crime may serve as evidence of

likelihood of recidivism if they evince the defendant’s incorrigibility.” (quotations and

citations omitted)). In addition, although this is Youngbear’s first conviction for

Appellate Case: 06-1257 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/21/2006 Entry ID: 2058979
-4-

child sexual abuse, the allegations and dismissed charges that he sexually abused other

children “indicate[] a likelihood of future sexual abuse not reflected in his criminal

history category.” United States v. Mugan, 441 F.3d 622, 633 (8th Cir. 2006); see also

United States v. Cramer, 414 F.3d 983, 987 (8th Cir. 2005) (citing United States v.

Fawbush, 946 F.2d 584, 587 (8th Cir. 1991)). In light of the aggravating

circumstances present in this case, we conclude the district court did not abuse its

discretion in determining an upward departure was warranted.

We also believe the ultimate sentence of 220 months’ imprisonment is

reasonable under § 3553(a) for the reasons discussed above. The record reflects the

district court took into account the relevant § 3553(a) factors such as Youngbear’s

criminal history and the need to promote respect for the law, provide deterrence, and

protect the public from further crimes. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1), (2). In light of

Youngbear’s extensive criminal history and the dismissed child sexual abuse charges

against him, we cannot conclude the sentence imposed by the district court was

unreasonable.

For the above stated reasons, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-1257 Page: 4 Date Filed: 06/21/2006 Entry ID: 2058979