United States v. Cecil Aldridge

Filing

PER CURIAM OPINION FILED - THE COURT: Roger L. Wollman, C. Arlen Beam and Duane Benton (UNPUBLISHED) [4159157] [13-2702]

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-2702 ___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Cecil Aldridge lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: May 23, 2014 Filed: May 30, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Cecil Aldridge appeals his within-Guidelines-range sentence of 192 months, following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Aldridge asserts the sentence is substantively unreasonable Appellate Case: 13-2702 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/30/2014 Entry ID: 4159157 because the district court1 failed to adequately consider the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We have carefully reviewed the record, see United States v. Borromeo, 657 F.3d 754, 756 (8th Cir. 2011) (reviewing district court's sentencing decision for an abuse of discretion), and find the district court properly considered the relevant sentencing factors, see United States v. Blackmon, 662 F.3d 981, 988 (8th Cir. 2011) (finding the district court's § 3553(a) explanation was sufficient and no particular recitation was necessary), and did not impose an unreasonable sentence, see United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to sentence within the Guidelines range). Accordingly, we affirm. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable James M. Moody, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas. -2- Appellate Case: 13-2702 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/30/2014 Entry ID: 4159157

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?