Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-07-02117/USCOURTS-ca8-07-02117-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Patrick Shawn Florang
Appellant
United States
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for

the Northern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-2117

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Northern District of Iowa.

Patrick Shawn Florang, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 18, 2008

 Filed: February 4, 2008

___________

Before BYE, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Patrick Florang challenges the reasonableness of

the 292-month prison sentence the district court1

 imposed after he pleaded guilty to

(1) possession of ammunition by an unlawful user of controlled substances, in

violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), (3), and 924(a)(2); and (2) conspiracy to

distribute more than 5 grams of actual methamphetamine after a prior felony drug

conviction, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B)(viii). Florang also argues

Appellate Case: 07-2117 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/04/2008 Entry ID: 3398412
-2-

the district court improperly accorded his Guidelines sentence a presumption of

reasonableness.

We conclude that the court appropriately applied the Guidelines and did not

treat his advisory Guidelines range as presumptively reasonable. See United States

v. Akers, 476 F.3d 602, 605 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 101 (2007) (application

of Guidelines reviewed de novo). We further conclude that Florang’s 292-month

prison sentence is reasonable and not an abuse of the district court’s discretion

because the court properly took into account only relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors

and did not commit a clear error of judgment in weighing those factors. See 18 U.S.C.

§ 3553(a)(1)-(3) (court shall consider, inter alia, nature and circumstances of offense

and history and characteristics of defendant; need for sentence imposed to afford

adequate deterrence and provide defendant with needed medical care or other

correctional treatment; and kinds of sentences available); Rita v. United States, 127

S. Ct. 2456, 2462-69 (2007) (allowing appellate presumption of reasonableness for

sentences within Guidelines range district court’s sentencing analysis was legally

sufficient when record showed that court listened to each argument and considered

evidence in support of sentence below advisory Guidelines range, even though court

did not elaborate on its reasons); United States v. Boss, 493 F.3d 986, 987 (8th Cir.

2007) (reasonableness of sentence reviewed for abuse of discretion); United States v.

Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th. Cir. 2005) (listing circumstances in which abuse of

discretion may occur).

Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 07-2117 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/04/2008 Entry ID: 3398412