Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
No. 10-5023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Louise W. Flanagan,
Chief District Judge. (5:09-cr-00373-FL-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Steven Wayne Thompson pled guilty to health care fraud
and
was
sentenced
to
fifty-eight
months
of
imprisonment.
He
We
sentence
is
reviewed
for
reasonableness
under
an
Id.
reasonableness
totality
of
of
the
the
sentence,
circumstances,
taking
including
into
the
account
extent
of
the
any
to
court
acted
impose
such
reasonably
a
both
sentence
2
and
with
with
respect
to
its
respect
to
the
v.
2007).
Hernandez-Villanueva,
473
F.3d
118,
123
United
(4th
Cir.
(2010),
[i]f
defendants
reliable
criminal
information
history
indicates
category
that
substantially
the
under-
Additionally, upward
contemplated
by
the
Guidelines.
USSG
4A1.3,
comment. (n.2(B)).
Here, the district courts decision to depart upwardly
was
reasonable.
Thompsons
The
repeated
district
and
court
numerous
found
that,
offenses
because
of
of
obtaining
an
upward
departure
was
to
account
for
the
commit
other
crimes.
Moving
3
incrementally
down
the
Thompsons
committing
parties
court
criminal
other
and
history
crimes.
considering
sentenced
him
and
After
the
to
58
the
likelihood
hearing
3553(a)
months
argument
factors,
of
him
from
the
the
imprisonment,
district
an
upward
We
conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
determining that a departure was warranted.
In addition, we conclude the extent of the district
courts departure was reasonable.
approach.
Dalton,
477
See
F.3d
USSG
195,
199
4A1.3(a)(4)(A);
(4th
Cir.
United
2007).
The
by
court
USSG
Having
appropriately
4A1.3,
found
p.s.,
Thompsons
employed
for
the
crafting
offense
level
methodology
an
of
upward
8
was
History
Category
appropriate
to
VI
the
until
case.
it
USSG
[found]
guideline
4A1.3(a)(4)(B),
range
p.s.
The
were
not
defendants
adequate
criminal
to
history
reflect
or
the
the
seriousness
likelihood
that
of
he
the
will
was
reasonable.
Moreover,
the
and
materials
legal
before
adequately
We therefore affirm
contentions
the
court
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED