Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Jahkeem RYAN, aka Jah Banko, Maurice Wood, aka Piff, Defendants-Appellants.
SUMMARY ORDER
Jahkeem Ryan appeals from a judgment of the District Court (Kahn, J.) sentencing him principally to a term of imprisonment of seventy-one months. This summary order addresses Ryan’s challenge to his sentence. A separate opinion filed simultaneously with this summary order resolves the consolidated appeal of Ryan’s codefendant-appellant, Maurice Wood. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and the record of prior proceedings, to which we refer only as necessary to explain our decision to affirm.
Ryan argues that his sentence was substantively unreasonable both because he received a higher sentence (by fourteen months) than his codefendant, Maurice Wood, and because the District Court failed to depart or vary downward from the applicable Guidelines range based on his family circumstances or his overstated criminal history category. We are not persuaded by either argument.
As to the first argument, there is an “apparent explanation” for the fourteen-month disparity between Ryan’s sentence and Wood’s. United States v. Ebbers, 458 F.3d 110, 129 (2d Cir. 2006). Ryan and Wood both pled guilty to one felon-in-possession charge, but Ryan pled guilty to four controlled-substance charges, while Wood pled guilty to just two. And Wood completed drug treatment programs and programs in jail, while Ryan had a record of deserting treatment programs.
Second, the District Court did not abuse its discretion in declining to depart or vary downward based on Ryan’s family circumstances, which were no more extraordinary than those of many defendants. Nor can we say that the District Court abused its discretion in including Ryan’s youthful offender misdemeanor to calculate his criminal history category. The District Court may properly have viewed that offense as the start of a pattern of criminal activity.
We have considered Ryan’s remaining arguments and conclude that they are without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court with respect to Jahkeem Ryan, Nos. 17-3919, 17-3969, is AFFIRMED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 17-3919-cr(L), No. 17-3969-cr(CON), No. 18-985-cr(CON)
Decided: August 16, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)