US v. John Burkey, No. 13-4774 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4774 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN A. BURKEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Parkersburg. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (6:13-cr-00106-1) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Circuit Judges. Judge, Decided: March 31, 2014 and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne, Appellate Counsel, Lex A. Coleman, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin II, United States Attorney, Erik S. Goes, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John A. Burkey, pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to possession of a stolen firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(j) (2012). to 100 months The district court sentenced Burkey imprisonment, Guidelines range. within his properly calculated On appeal, Burkey 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) (2012). Finding no reversible error, we affirm. We review the district court s sentence, whether inside, just outside, or significantly outside the Guidelines range[,] under a deferential abuse-of-discretion Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). sentence for substantive reasonableness, we standard. When reviewing a examine[] the totality of the circumstances, and, if the sentence is within the properly-calculated Guidelines 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). Such a presumption is rebutted only if the defendant shows that the sentence is unreasonable when measured against the § 3553(a) factors. United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379 (4th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). We conclude that Burkey has failed to overcome the appellate presumption of reasonableness afforded his sentence. 2 The district court reasonably concluded that Burkey s extensive criminal history warranted a sentence that would protect the public and deter Notably, conduct. Burkey the from engaging district in court further did not criminal ignore the positive changes Burkey had made in his life and declined to impose the statutory maximum sentence for that reason. extent Burkey criminal that argues history district determining factors. 2011). that the district over other sentencing courts have extremely the weight to be given court emphasized factors, broad each To the we reiterate discretion of the his when § 3553(a) United States v. Jeffery, 631 F.3d 669, 679 (4th Cir. In sum, we conclude that Burkey s within-Guidelines sentence is 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.
