United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________ 

No. 20-2493

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Marques M. Robinson

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City

____________ 

Submitted: June 14, 2021

Filed: June 25, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, ARNOLD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Marques M. Robinson pled guilty to possessing a firearm and ammunition as 

a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(a)(2). The district 
-2- 

court1 sentenced him to 108 months in prison and three years of supervised release. 

He appeals. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. 

After shooting a gun outside a liquor store, Robinson pled guilty to two counts 

of being a felon in possession of a firearm, admitting at least six prior felony 

convictions. The court accepted the plea. The Presentence Investigation Report 

(PSR) calculated an advisory sentencing guidelines range of 140 to 175 months in 

prison (lowered to 120 months, the statutory maximum). The PSR recommended 

no reduction for acceptance of responsibility; Robinson objected. Overruling the 

objection, the district court imposed a sentence of 108 months.

Robinson appeals the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, arguing the 

sentence was greater than necessary given his physical and mental health issues and 

his acceptance of responsibility. This court reviews for abuse of discretion. United 

States v. DaCruz-Mendes, 970 F.3d 904, 909 (8th Cir. 2020). An abuse of discretion 

occurs when a district court overlooks a relevant factor in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), 

“gives significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor,” or commits a clear 

error of judgment in weighing relevant factors. United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 

455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc). 

Because the advisory guidelines range is above the 120-month statutory 

maximum, the statutory maximum became the guidelines range. See United States 

v. Lazarski, 560 F.3d 731, 733 (8th Cir. 2009). The district court varied downward 

to 108 months. “[W]here a district court has sentenced a defendant below the 

advisory guidelines range, it is nearly inconceivable that the court abused its 

discretion in not varying downward still further.” United States v. McKanry, 628 

F.3d 1010, 1022 (8th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted). 

1

The Honorable Beth Phillips, Chief Judge, United States District Court for 

the Western District of Missouri. 
-3- 

At sentencing, the district court reviewed mitigating factors, including

“significant mental health issues that need treatment,” and Robinson’s respect for 

the district court and his attorney. Although it denied credit for acceptance of 

responsibility, the district court acknowledged Robinson’s guilty plea. The district 

court also reviewed aggravating factors including a history of “a lot of violence,” 

“two robbery-in-the-second-degrees,” “violence to a Department of Corrections 

employee,” and “troubling” aspects of the current offense like “pointing the gun” at 

a woman. Weighing the mitigating and aggravating factors, the district court 

determined Robinson warranted “a significant sentence,” with a downward variance 

of 12 months. The district court’s decision to assign greater weight to some 

aggravating factors than to mitigating factors “was well within its wide sentencing 

latitude.” United States v. Pickar, 666 F.3d 1167, 1169 (8th Cir. 2012). 

*******

The judgment is affirmed. 

_____________________________