Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03945/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03945-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Leonard L. Jones
Appellant
United States of America
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. 05-3945

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

*

v. * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

Leonard L. Jones, also known as * District of South Dakota.

Artie Boy Jones, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: December 13, 2006

Filed: December 18, 2006 

___________

Before MURPHY, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Leonard Jones appeals the concurrent 120-month and 180-month prison

sentences the district court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting a

third-degree burglary, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1153 and S.D.C.L. § 22-32-8, and

engaging in a sexual act with a minor between the ages of 12 and 16 years, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2243(a), and 2246(2)(A). Although Jones’s total

sentence was 55 months below his advisory Guidelines range of 235-293 months, he

Appellate Case: 05-3945 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/18/2006 Entry ID: 3260035
-2-

contends that his sentence violates his constitutional right to due process because there

is “‘an extreme disparity between the crime charged and the sentence imposed.’” (Br.

at 6-7 (quoting United States v. Red Elk, 368 F.3d 1047, 1051-52 (8th Cir. 2004 )

(reversed on other grounds) (citing United States v. Galloway, 976 F.2d 414, 426 (8th

Cir. 1992))).) He also maintains that the district court did not take into account each

of the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and that his sentence is unreasonable when

compared with the 57-month sentence imposed for a sexual abuse crime in United

States v. Paz, 411 F.3d 906 (8th Cir. 2005).

We review the district court’s sentencing decision for unreasonableness under

section 3553(a), and we will reverse only for an abuse of discretion. See United States

v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 261-62 (2005) (sentences are reviewed for unreasonableness;

section 3553(a) factors will guide appellate courts in determining whether sentence

is unreasonable); United States v. Maurstad, 454 F.3d 787, 789 (8th Cir. 2006)

(district court should calculate Guidelines range, determine if departure is warranted

under Guidelines, then consider the sentencing factors in section 3553(a) in imposing

reasonable sentence; this court reviews for abuse of discretion); United States v.

Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1001 (8th Cir.) (method for post-Booker sentencing involves

determining availability of Guidelines departures and consideration of factors under

§ 3553(a) for non-Guidelines, non-departure sentences), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 276

(2005). 

Prior to pronouncing its sentence, the district court expressly stated that it was

taking into account all the section 3553(a) factors. For example, the court

acknowledged Jones’s young age, difficult upbringing, and criminal record. See 18

U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) (factor includes history and characteristics of defendant); see also

United States v. Long Soldier, 431 F.3d 1120, 1123 (8th Cir. 2005) (district court was

not required to mention “§ 3553(a)” in sentencing defendant; relevant inquiry is

whether court actually considered § 3553(a) factors and whether appellate court’s

review of those factors leads it to conclude that they support a finding of

Appellate Case: 05-3945 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/18/2006 Entry ID: 3260035
-3-

reasonableness). Moreover, the disparity between Jones’s overall sentence and the

sentence imposed in Paz is not unwarranted. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6) (need to

avoid unwarranted disparities among defendants with similar records who are guilty

of similar conduct). Even assuming the crime Jones committed was similar to the one

committed by the defendant in Paz, Jones was convicted of an additional crime, and

had a higher offense level and Guidelines range. See Paz, 411 F.3d at 908 (defendant

pleaded guilty to one count of sexual abuse of minor; his total offense level was 19,

and his Guidelines range was 46-57 months). The district court’s sentencing decision

was not unreasonable.

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3945 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/18/2006 Entry ID: 3260035