United States v. Hall, No. 15-1405 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed the district court's imposition of an above-Guidelines sentence and the district court's refusal to order that the federal sentence run concurrently to state sentences. The court concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing an above-Guidelines sentence of 90 months’ imprisonment where the district court cited defendant's extensive criminal history and the circumstances of the offense as reasons for the above-Guidelines sentence. Given the district court's consideration of the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors and the court's explanation that it declined to exercise its discretion for the specific reasons explained at sentencing, the district court did not abuse its discretion in deferring to the state court and declining to order that the sentences be served concurrently. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Per Curiam - Before Loken, Gruender and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Above-Guidelines sentence was not an abuse of the district court's discretion as the court relied on appropriate factors, such as defendant's extensive criminal history and the circumstances of the offense, in making its sentencing decision; the court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to make defendant's federal sentence concurrent with his yet-to-be-imposed state sentence.
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.