US v. Mark Lewis, No. 13-6798 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-6798 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARK MCGARRETT LEWIS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:09-cr-00949-RBH-1) Submitted: November 21, 2013 Decided: November 25, 2013 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mark sentence Act. McGarrett imposed upon Lewis appeals resentencing under from the the 74-month Fair Sentencing He contends that the sentence is unreasonable because the district court denied his request for a variance based on his post-sentencing rehabilitation rehabilitation efforts § 3553(a) (2012). without impacted addressing the factors in how Lewis s 18 U.S.C. We affirm. We have reviewed Lewis s sentence and conclude that the sentence imposed was reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Llamas, 599 F.3d 381, 387 (4th Cir. 2010). The district court followed the necessary procedural sentencing steps in Lewis. The court properly calculated and considered the applicable Guidelines range, and appropriately treated the Sentencing Guidelines as advisory. We conclude that the district court appropriately considered and rejected Lewis s request for a variant sentence in light of the § 3553(a) factors and Lewis s individual characteristics and history, sufficiently explained the reasons for the sentence, and did sentence. not abuse its discretion in imposing the chosen See Gall, 552 U.S. at 41; United States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007) (applying appellate presumption of reasonableness to within-Guidelines sentence). 2 Accordingly, we affirm Lewis s 74-month sentence. We deny Lewis s motion for a transcript at government expense and his motion for leave to file a supplemental brief. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3