Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02388/USCOURTS-ca8-09-02388-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ira Gene Chase
Appellant
United States of America
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. 09-2388

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Northern

* District of Iowa.

Ira Gene Chase, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: April 13, 2010

Filed: May 12, 2010

___________

Before BYE, BEAM, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Ira Chase challenges the substantive reasonableness of the within-guidelines

sentence of 235 months the district court1

 imposed following our remand for resentencing. See United States v. Chase, 560 F.3d 828, 831 (8th Cir. 2009). Chase

pleaded guilty, without the benefit of a plea agreement, to a two-count indictment for

attempt to distribute and conspiracy to distribute over 500 grams or more of a mixture

containing methamphetamine. At the time of his plea, Chase was sixty-two years old.

His criminal history category was I, and his offense level was thirty-seven. The

Appellate Case: 09-2388 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/12/2010 Entry ID: 3663694
-2-

recommended guideline range was between 210 and 262 months. Prior to sentencing,

Chase filed a motion for downward variance, asking for the mandatory minimum of

120 months, on the basis of, among other things, his advanced age, poor health, and

low criminal history. The district court declined to vary downward, but on appeal, we

reversed and remanded for re-sentencing, holding that the district court used language

making it difficult to discern whether it had confused a downward departure with a

downward variance. Id. at 831-32. Upon remand and re-sentencing, the district court

carefully distinguished between a downward variance and departure, declined to vary,

and re-sentenced Chase to 235 months' imprisonment.

We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for an abuse of

discretion. United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc).

No abuse of discretion occurred here. Chase cites to numerous cases wherein a

variance was granted for advanced age and health reasons. However, while the

district courts in those cases appropriately exercised their discretion in granting a

variance under the facts presented, the district court's refusal to similarly vary in this

case was not an abuse of its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 09-2388 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/12/2010 Entry ID: 3663694