United States v. Lemar Dasher, 4th Cir. (2013)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. Lemar Dasher, 4th Cir. (2013)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4814
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff Appellee,
v.
LEMAR RAYMOND DASHER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (5:12-cr-00128-BR-1)
Submitted:
July 19, 2013
Decided:
August 14, 2013
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P.
May-Parker, Joshua L. Rogers, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
In July 2012, Lemar Raymond Dasher pled guilty without
a plea agreement to one count of bank robbery, in violation of
18 U.S.C. 2113(a) (2006).
The district court sentenced Dasher
to 78 months imprisonment, the top of the applicable Guidelines
range.
Dasher
sentence
than
is
timely
appeals,
substantively
necessary
to
comply
arguing
unreasonable
with
the
that
the
because
it
purposes
of
78-month
is
greater
18
U.S.C.
3553(a) (2006).
This
court
reviews
sentence
for
reasonableness,
applying a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
Gall v.
Where, as here, the
defendant does not challenge the procedural reasonableness of
his
sentence,
reasonableness
we
review
under
the
the
sentence
only
for
abuse-of-discretion
substantive
standard.
United States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 575 (4th Cir. 2010).
sentence
imposed
must
be
sufficient,
but
not
greater
necessary, to comply with the purposes [of sentencing].
U.S.C.
3553(a).
reasonableness,
circumstances.
In
we
examine[]
sentence
the
for
The
than
18
substantive
totality
of
the
United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza, 597 F.3d 212,
216 (4th Cir. 2010).
calculated
reviewing
Id.;
Guidelines
If the sentence is within the properly
range,
we
presume
sentence is substantively reasonable.
2
on
appeal
that
the
United States v. Susi,
674
F.3d
278,
289
(4th
Cir.
2012).
Such
presumption
is
rebutted only by showing that the sentence is unreasonable when
measured
against
Montes-Pineda,
the
445
F.3d
3553(a)
375,
factors.
379
United
(2006)
States
(internal
v.
quotation
marks omitted).
Dasher argues that the totality of the circumstances
in
his
case
Guidelines
do
not
range.
warrant
Dasher
sentence
concedes
at
the
that
top
of
the
three-level
enhancement for possession of a weapon was properly applied to
him.
He argues, however, that the fact that he did not actually
possess a weapon, but only created the appearance of a gun in a
bandaged hand, should have weighed more heavily in his favor.
[D]istrict
courts
have
extremely
broad
discretion
when determining the weight to be given each of the 3553(a)
factors.
2011).
United States v. Jeffery, 631 F.3d 669, 679 (4th Cir.
In imposing a sentence at the top of the Guidelines
range, the district court focused on the violent threat made by
Dasher during the bank robbery and on his past criminal history.
Because
the
district
court
did
not
abuse
its
discretion
in
according significant weight to these factors, we conclude that
Dasher has failed to rebut the presumption of reasonableness
accorded his within-Guidelines sentence.
Accordingly, we affirm Dashers sentence.
We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
3
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before
this
court
and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
