United States v. Edison, No. 13-2967 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to drug offenses pursuant to a written plea agreement. The court concluded that, given defendant's criminal history, the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a below-guidelines sentence of 176 months. Further, the disparity between defendant's and his codefendant's sentence was not unwarranted given that the codefendant was not a career offender and did not face a mandatory minimum sentence. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment of the district court.
Court Description: Criminal Case - sentence. District court did not abuse its discretion in granting a downward variance and sentencing Edison to a below-guideline sentence of 176 months. Sentence did not result in an unwarranted sentence disparity with his codefendant because codefendant was not a career offender and did not face a mandatory minimum sentence.
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.