United States v. Harrell, No. 19-2350 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed defendant's 46 month sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to being a prohibited person in possession of a firearm. Even if the court assumes that the district court's statement at sentencing about gun violence in the Quad Cities was plainly erroneous because it was unsupported by the sentencing record and the PSR, defendant could not show that the error affected his substantial rights. In this case, there was no reasonable probability that but for the alleged error his sentence would have been lower. The court also held that defendant's sentence is not substantively unreasonable where the district court considered the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors, including mitigation circumstances such as defendant's mental health history and his considerable post-offense rehabilitation efforts.
Court Description: [Kelly, Author, with Wollman and Stras, Circuit Judges] Criminal case - Sentencing. Even if the court assumes that the district court's statement at sentencing about gun violence in the Quad Cities was plainly erroneous because it was unsupported by the sentencing record and the PSR, defendant could not show that the error affected his substantial rights because there was not a reasonable probability that but for the alleged error his sentence would have been lower; the 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.