US v. Sherron Degraffenreid, No. 13-4368 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4368 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHERRON ANTONIO DEGRAFFENREID, a/k/a Shaerron Degraffenried, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cr-00254-BR-1) Submitted: November 21, 2013 Decided: November 27, 2013 Before DAVIS, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Yvonne V. Watford-McKinney, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sherron Degraffenreid pled guilty, without a written plea agreement, convicted of sentenced a to possessing felony, 18 a firearm U.S.C. § after having 922(g) (2012), a within-Guidelines term of He imprisonment. unreasonable to appeals, that his because the arguing district court 37 been and months sentence failed was to was address mitigating evidence he presented at sentencing. In reviewing a sentence, we must first ensure that the district court did not commit any significant procedural error, such as failing to properly calculate the applicable Guidelines range, failing to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors, or failing to adequately explain the sentence. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The district court is not required to robotically tick through § 3553(a) s every subsection. (4th Cir. 2006). United States v. Johnson, 445 F.3d 339, 345 However, the district court must place on the record an individualized assessment based on the particular facts of the case before it. need not be elaborate or This individualized assessment lengthy, but it must provide a rationale tailored to the particular case at hand and adequate to permit meaningful appellate review. United States v. Carter, 564 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 2009) (quoting Gall, 552 U.S. at 50) (internal footnote omitted)). 2 At Degraffenreid s sentencing hearing, his attorney argued for a below-Guidelines sentence of 24 months pointing out to the court, inter alia, Degraffenreid s excellent work history, his family s already sustained Degraffenreid support, after addressed and an the serious attack court injuries another by he inmate. personally, apologizing had for his conduct and also pointing out that he had remained in school after his indictment and completed a course to obtain his commercial driver s license. We including the adequately explained clearly conclude, based sentencing considered its took into our transcript, the reasons on for review that relevant the the the court factors sentence. the record, district § 3553(a) chosen consideration of specific The and court arguments Degraffenreid s attorney made for a downward variance but found that a Guidelines sentence was appropriate. Accordingly, we affirm Degraffenreid s sentence. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3