United States v. Dale Gatewood, No. 13-1440 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Criminal case - Sentencing. Sentence imposed upon the revocation of defendant's supervised release was not unreasonable; district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that due to the nature of defendant's violation his sentence should run consecutively to his state sentence.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-1440 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Dale Gatewood lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis ____________ Submitted: September 23, 2013 Filed: October 1, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Dale Gatewood appeals his within-Guidelines-range, 24-month sentence imposed by the district court1 after Gatewood violated the conditions of his supervised release. We affirm. During his supervised released, Gatewood pled guilty to burglary in the first degree in state court and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment, in violation of the conditions of his supervised release. At his revocation hearing, Gatewood admitted his violation, and the district court, recognizing the 21-24 months' imprisonment Guidelines range, sentenced him to 24 months' imprisonment to run consecutively to Gatewood's undischarged state sentence. Gatewood asserts that the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable sentence because the court failed to consider his longstanding addiction to heroin and, when the court decided to impose a sentence to run consecutive to his state sentence, it failed to consider the length of the state sentence. We review the substantive reasonableness for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Deegan, 605 F.3d 625, 629 (8th Cir. 2010). Having reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude the district court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, including Gatewood's heroin addiction. United States v. Bridges, 569 F.3d 374, 379 (8th Cir. 2009) (recognizing that "[t]he district court has wide latitude to weigh the § 3553(a) factors . . . and assign some factors greater weight than others in determining an appropriate sentence."). Contrary to Gatewood's second argument, the district court did note Gatewood's undischarged five-year state sentence, but determined that due to the nature of Gatewood's violation of his supervised release, the sentence should run consecutively to the state sentence. See United States v. McDonald, 521 F.3d 975, 980 (8th Cir. 2008) (we review the determination to impose a consecutive sentence for reasonableness and the district court has "wide discretion" 1 The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. -2- to order a sentence be served consecutively to an undischarged sentence.). We find no error in the imposition of this sentence and, accordingly, affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
