US v. Demario Pemberton, No. 12-4633 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4633 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DEMARIO LADARL PEMBERTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cr-00055-JAB-1) Submitted: January 29, 2013 Decided: January 31, 2013 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen III, Federal Public Defender, William S. Trivette, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Graham T. Green, Assistant United States Attorney, WinstonSalem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Demario Ladarl Pemberton pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2006). district court imprisonment, Guidelines sentenced within Pemberton his range. On to properly appeal, eighty-two calculated Pemberton The months Sentencing challenges the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, contending that it is greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006). We review discretion. When Pemberton s sentence for abuse of Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). reviewing examine[] sentence Finding no reversible error, we affirm. the is a sentence totality within the of for substantive the reasonableness, circumstances, properly calculated and, Guidelines if we the range, apply a presumption on appeal that the sentence is substantively reasonable. United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza, 597 F.3d 212, 216-17 (4th Cir. 2010). the defendant measured shows against Montes-Pineda, that the 445 Such a presumption is rebutted only if § F.3d the sentence 3553(a) 375, is unreasonable factors. 379 (4th Cir. United 2006) when States v. (internal quotation marks omitted). We conclude that Pemberton s eighty-two-month, withinGuidelines sentence is substantively 2 reasonable, as Pemberton fails to overcome the appellate presumption of reasonableness afforded his sentence. The district court carefully considered the noting § 3553(a) factors, the seriousness of Pemberton s § 922(g) offense and related armed robbery, Pemberton s prior convictions, Pemberton s lack of respect for the law, and the need to protect the public. particular needs of Moreover, the court considered the Pemberton in crafting his sentence, recommending that he receive substance abuse and mental health treatment. In sum, we conclude that the district court acted well within its discretion by finding that Pemberton s eightytwo-month sentence was not greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.
