United States v. Cottrell, No. 16-1775 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed his 360 month sentence after pleading guilty to one count of receipt of child pornography and one count of possession of child pornography. The court concluded that the district court erred in relying on unproven, objected-to facts by relying on defendant's unproven conviction for second degree sexual abuse as a juvenile; the conviction was only one basis for denying defendant's requested downward variance; and defendant failed to establish a reasonable probability that he would have received a more favorable sentence if the district court had not relied on his unproven prior conviction. The court also concluded that defendant's sentence came within the guideline range and was amply supported by the record. Because defendant's sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Melloy, Author, with Colloton and Murphy, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court erred in relying on unproven, objected-to-facts at sentencing where the government did not prove a prior conviction by a preponderance of the evidence; however, the prior conviction was only of the grounds stated for denying defendant's requested downward variance, and defendant cannot show that but for the error he would have received a more favorable sentence; sentence was not substantively unreasonable as it was within the guidelines range and was amply supported by the record. [ April 03, 2017
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.