Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Marvin F. BAKER, Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-06-26
Citations: 226 F. App'x 647
Docket Number: No. 06-3456
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Marvin F. BAKER, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 226
Pages: 647–648

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Marvin F. BAKER, Appellant.
No. 06-3456.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: June 21, 2007.
Filed: June 26, 2007.
Douglas Richard Semisch, U.S. Attorney’s Office, argued, Omaha, NE, for Appellee.
David R. Stickman, Federal Public Defender’s Office, argued, Omaha, NE, for Appellant.
Marvin F. Baker, Omaha, NE, pro se.
Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
[UNPUBLISHED]

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal of his 33-month prison sentence for possessing a firearm with an obliterated serial number, Marvin F. Baker (Baker) challenges his sentence as unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) for failure to give appropriate weight to mitigating factors in his criminal history, such as his age, and for making a clear error in judgment when balancing the § 3553(a) factors.
Upon careful review of the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Baker to 33 months' imprisonment. See United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1003 (8th Cir.) (standard of review), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 126 S.Ct. 276, 163 L.Ed.2d 246 (2005). We afford a presumption of reasonableness to the district court's sentence, which fell at the bottom of the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. See Rita v. United States, — U.S. —, —, 127 S.Ct. 2456, — L.Ed.2d — (2007) (affirming the application of a presumption of reasonableness by a court of appeals to a district court's sentence that reflects a proper application of the Sentencing Guidelines); United States v. Likens, 464 F.3d 823, 825 (8th Cir.2006) ("The guideline range, though advisory, is presumed to be reasonable." (citation omitted)). The district court appropriately weighed Baker's youth and relatively minor past crimes against other § 3553(a) factors, such as the need for a significant prison sentence to halt Baker's pattern of criminal conduct and the need for a sentence long enough to provide Baker with meaningful rehabilitation and training. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1) (history and character istics of defendant), (a)(2)(B) (afford adequate deterrence), and (a)(2)(D) (provide defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in most effective manner); United States v. Swehla, 442 F.3d 1143, 1145-47 (8th Cir.2006) (upholding sentence and finding criminal history not overstated where the defendant committed many crimes from ages 15 to 18).
Therefore, we affirm.
. The Honorable Laurie Smith Camp, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska.