United States v. Davis, No. 16-2008 (8th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's 210 month sentence, holding that it was not error for a district court to explicitly not consider the possibility of a state court sentence when ordering that a federal sentence be consecutive to any possible state-court sentence. In this case, defendant's sentence was procedurally reasonable where the district court did not err by expressly not considering the fact that defendant's probation could possibly be revoked. The court rejected defendant's claim that USSG 5G1.3 obligates the district court to examine the length of potential future state terms of imprisonment. Furthermore, defendant's sentence was substantively reasonable where the district court considered the relevant 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors.
Court Description: Rossiter, Author, with Riley and Beam, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. The district court acted within in its discretion in ordering defendant's federal sentence in this supervision revocation proceeding to run consecutively to his anticipated state sentence; Guidelines Sec. 5G1.3 does not require the district court to consider a potential state term of imprisonment in setting sentence; defendant's sentence was not substantively unreasonable.
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.