UNITED STATES v. NEAL (2018)

Jacquez Keshawn Neal appeals his sentence of imprisonment for 60 months after pleading guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He contends his sentence above the advisory guidelines range is substantively unreasonable because the district court improperly considered his criminal history and his age. We affirm.

We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential standard for abuse of discretion. United States v. Foster, 878 F.3d 1297, 1304 (11th Cir. 2018).

Neal’s sentence is substantively reasonable. The district court properly weighed his serious criminal history and provided a compelling basis for its upward variance, which was well below the statutory maximum sentence of 120 months of imprisonment. The district court considered the need to promote respect for the law, protect the public, afford adequate deterrence, and provide needed educational and vocational training. The district court also found that Neal’s youth was not a mitigating factor in the light of his extensive criminal history. At age 19, Neal already had a criminal history category of V with prior convictions for disorderly conduct, obstruction of governmental operations, robbery in the third degree, shooting into an occupied building, and receiving stolen property. The district court did not abuse its discretion.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM: