[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 20-10530

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 3:18-cr-00199-BJD-JBT-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

KIRKLAND GEORGE LAWRENCE, 

a.k.a. Killa, 

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(March 16, 2021)

Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, MARTIN and BRANCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

USCA11 Case: 20-10530 Date Filed: 03/16/2021 Page: 1 of 3
2

Kirkland Lawrence appeals his sentence of 105 months of imprisonment 

following his convictions of one count of attempting to distribute heroin, 21 U.S.C. 

§§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), 846, three counts of distributing cocaine, id.

§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), one count of possessing a firearm in furtherance of drug 

trafficking, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i), and two counts of possessing a firearm as 

a felon, id. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). Lawrence pleaded guilty to all charges without 

a plea agreement. He argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. We 

affirm.

We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence for abuse of 

discretion. United States v. Early, 686 F.3d 1219, 1221 (11th Cir. 2012). The party 

who challenges the sentence has the burden to show that the sentence is 

unreasonable in the light of the record and the statutory sentencing factors. Id. The 

district court must impose a sentence “sufficient, but not greater than necessary” to 

comply with the purposes of sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Those factors 

include the need to reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the 

law, provide just punishment for the offense, deter criminal conduct, and protect 

the public from the defendant’s future criminal conduct. Id. The district court must 

also consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, the history and 

characteristics of the defendant, and the advisory guideline range. Id.

USCA11 Case: 20-10530 Date Filed: 03/16/2021 Page: 2 of 3
3

The district court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing Lawrence to 105 

months of imprisonment. After he served an 11-year sentence for armed robbery, 

Lawrence returned to criminal activity by selling drugs and firearms. And he 

endangered his child by including her in his transactions. A video recording made 

by a confidential informant showed Lawrence’s daughter sitting on his lap with 

drugs and a gun nearby. The district court reasonably determined that the need to 

punish, deter similar future conduct, and protect vulnerable persons, like children, 

warranted sentencing Lawrence to six concurrent terms of 45 months and order 

that those terms run consecutive to a statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 60 

months for possessing a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. See id.

Lawrence argues that the district court gave his problematic childhood and his 

desire to provide for his daughter inadequate weight, but the decision about what 

weight to give any sentencing factor rests within the sound discretion of the district 

court. See United States v. Clay, 483 F.3d 739, 743 (11th Cir. 2007). Lawrence’s 

sentence, which is within his advisory guideline range and well below his statutory 

maximum penalty of 20 years of imprisonment, is reasonable. See United States v. 

Smith, 967 F.3d 1196, 1215 (11th Cir. 2020) (below maximum penalty); United 

States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739, 746 (11th Cir. 2008) (within-guidelines sentence).

We AFFIRM Lawrence’s sentence. 

USCA11 Case: 20-10530 Date Filed: 03/16/2021 Page: 3 of 3