US v. Janell Fisher, No. 13-4502 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4502 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. JANELL TOVAH FISHER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Henry E. Hudson, District Judge. (3:13-cr-00024-HEH-1) Submitted: January 27, 2014 Decided: February 11, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark Bodner, Fairfax, Virginia, for Appellant. Dana J. Boente, Acting United States Attorney, Erik S. Siebert, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Janell Tovah Fisher appeals from the 120-month sentence imposed by the district court after his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2012). On appeal, Fisher claims that his sentence is procedurally and substantively unreasonable because the district court (1) overstated his criminal history and failed to consider the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors when imposing an upward variance; (2) failed to consider unwarranted sentencing disparities that could result from the imposition of the upward variance; excessively lengthy upward variance. and (3) imposed an We affirm. We review a sentence for reasonableness, applying an abuse of discretion standard. 38, 46, 51 (2007). Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. We first review for significant procedural error, and, if the sentence is free from such error, we then consider the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. 51. Procedural error includes improperly Id. at calculating[] the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider adequately the explain § 3553(a) the factors, chosen . sentence. . . or Id. failing to Substantive reasonableness is determined by considering the totality of the circumstances, including the extent of any variance from the Guidelines range. Id. An upward variance is permitted where 2 justified by the § 3553(a) factors. See id. We must give due deference to the district court s decision that the § 3553(a) factors, on a whole, justify the extent of the variance, and the fact that we might find a different sentence appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the district court. We is procedurally sentence first conclude that Fisher s reasonable. * Id. above-Guidelines The district court properly calculated Fisher s Guidelines range (and Fisher does not contend adequately otherwise), explained treated the the selected range as advisory, sentence. The and court specifically explained that Fisher s above-Guidelines sentence was warranted because the offense indicated involvement in significant drug-trafficking activity, Fisher had an extensive criminal record, and Fisher s prior experience with the criminal justice system lacked the desired deterrent effect. In addition, the court considered that the total offense level was inadequate to reflect Fisher s criminal history. Further, the court noting explicitly addressed Fisher s arguments, that counsel s arguments had persuaded it to impose a sentence lower than the sentence advocated by the Government. While the district court did not specifically address Fisher s argument * The advisory Guidelines range was seventy to eighty-seven months. 3 regarding state unwarranted that Because it the took sentencing into account disparities, district court all the clearly the court sentencing considered did factors. Fisher s individual circumstances, we conclude that Fisher s sentence is procedurally reasonable. We also hold that Fisher s sentence is substantively reasonable, including sentence considering the is extent nearly the of three totality the of the variance. years above circumstances, Although the Fisher s high-end of the advisory Guidelines range, the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that such a deviation was justified by the § 3553(a) factors, including Fisher s criminal history, the need to protect the public, and the need to provide adequate deterrence. Thus, we conclude that Fisher s 120-month sentence is reasonable. 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 4
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.
