United States of America v. Jevon Strayhorn

St. Louis, MO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant indicted for felony firearm possession.

Jevon Strayhorn appeals his 57-month sentence, following a guilty plea, to

being a felon in possession of a firearm. Strayhorn contends the district court

procedurally erred by failing to adequately explain why it did not take his suggestion

to sentence him below the Guidelines range, and instead sentenced him to the top of

the 46 to 57-month range. Strayhorn further contends that the sentence was

substantively unreasonable. We disagree on both counts.

In reviewing Strayhorn's sentencing challenge, we first ensure that the district

court committed no significant procedural error, which would include failing to

sufficiently explain its sentence. United States v. Bridges, 569 F.3d 374, 378 (8th

Cir. 2009). If the sentence is procedurally sound, we evaluate the substantive

reasonableness of the sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. Further,

a sentence imposed within the calculated Guidelines range is presumed reasonable.

United States v. Parker, 871 F.3d 590, 608 (8th Cir. 2017). The presumption may be

rebutted, but it is the defendant's burden to do so. United States v. Herra-Herra, 860

F.3d 1128, 1132 (8th Cir. 2017).

The district court did not err procedurally because it explained its reasons for

the chosen sentence. Our review of the record indicatesthat the district court was not

The Honorable Ronnie L. White, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1

District of Missouri.

-2-

inclined to give Strayhorn a below-range sentence given his history of recidivism,

including the fact that he committed the current offense while on supervised release

2

from a previous federal felon-in-possession conviction. The district court explained

the sentence well enough that we can discern on appeal why the district court chose

the sentence that it did. See United States v. Chavarria-Ortiz, 828 F.3d 668, 671 (8th

Cir. 2016) ("[W]here a matter is conceptually simple, and the record makes clear that

the sentencing judge considered the evidence and arguments, the law does not require

the judge to write or say more."). Nor has Strayhorn rebutted the presumption that

his within-Guidelines-range sentence is reasonable

Accordingly, we affirm.