US v. Mark Jenkins, No. 15-4069 (4th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-4069 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MARK ALLEN JENKINS, a/k/a Ibrahim Ibn Abu-Nidal, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (4:14-cr-00016-F-1) Submitted: September 16, 2015 Before AGEE and Circuit Judge. FLOYD, Circuit Decided: Judges, and October 2, 2015 HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leza Lee Driscoll, LAW OFFICE OF LEZA LEE DRISCOLL, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Mark Allen Jenkins appeals the 78-month upward departure sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty plea to bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (2012). On appeal, is Jenkins substantively contends that unreasonable in the light upward of departure the age of the convictions on which the court relied to justify the departure. We affirm. We review the sentence imposed by the district court for abuse of discretion. (2007). Because Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 Jenkins does not claim on appeal that the district court committed any procedural error, we review only for substantive circumstances. Cir. 2014). reasonableness under the totality of the United States v. Howard, 773 F.3d 519, 528 (4th “When reviewing a departure, we consider whether the sentencing court acted reasonably both with respect to its decision extent to of impose the such divergence a sentence from the and with respect sentencing to range.” the Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). The Sentencing Guidelines provide for an upward departure based on category the inadequacy “[i]f defendant’s underrepresents reliable criminal the of a defendant’s information history seriousness 2 of indicates category the criminal history that the significantly defendant’s criminal history or the likelihood that the defendant will commit other crimes.” (2014). U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.3(a)(1), p.s. “A district court may base an upward departure pursuant to § 4A1.3(a)(1) on a defendant’s prior convictions, even if those convictions are too old to be counted in the calculation of the [Sentencing] Guidelines range.” Howard, 773 F.3d at 529. We conclude that, under the totality of the circumstances, the district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing an upward departure upon finding that Jenkins’ criminal history category significantly underrepresented the seriousness of his criminal history and his likelihood of recidivism. conclude that the court did not abuse its We further discretion in determining the extent of the upward departure, given Jenkins’ extensive criminal history and his demonstrated recidivism. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. dispense with conclusions 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
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.
