Opinion ID: 66777
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Upward Departure at Sentencing

Text: Reynolds appeals the district court’s upward departure from the advisory guideline range and its imposition of the maximum sentence allowed. Reynolds’ Pre-sentence Investigation Report recommended an advisory guidelines sentencing range of 135 to 168 months for armed bank robbery and possession of 20 a firearm by a convicted felon and a mandatory minimum of 120 months to be served consecutively for discharge of a firearm during a crime of violence. Sent. Tr. at 62-63. The district court chose to depart from the advisory guideline range for armed bank robbery and imposed the maximum sentence allowed by statute of 300 months. When sentencing a defendant, a district court must first calculate the guideline range and then consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors to arrive at a reasonable sentence. United States v. Owens, 464 F.3d 1252, 1254 (11th Cir. 2006). Due to the nature and circumstances of this offense, the district court’s upward departure was reasonable. After calculating the guideline range, the court considered the 3553(a) factors and found that an increased sentence would further the goals of punishment and deterrence. Further, citing the blatant nature of the bank robbery, the court sentenced Reynolds above the guideline range because of the particularly egregious facts of the case. Reynolds fired on law enforcement and bank employees and even wounded an employee. The court explained that “Mr. Reynolds blasted his way into the bank shouting and shooting and creating as much terror and intimidation as he possibly could.” Sent. Tr. at 61. In fact, the court could not recall any bank robbery where “a weapon has been discharged as 21 wantonly as this one.” Id. at 62. We find the increased sentence was justified and reasonable.