United States v. Phillip Jones, Jr. ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 22-1654
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    Plaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Phillip Neal Jones, Jr.
    Defendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of Minnesota
    ____________
    Submitted: January 9, 2023
    Filed: March 14, 2023
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before GRUENDER, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Phillip Jones, Jr., appeals his sentence for possession of a firearm by a felon.
    See 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1). Jones left a loaded gun in his apartment, and children
    who were left alone there discovered it. One of them accidentally fired the gun,
    killing a six-year-old boy. Jones pleaded guilty.
    Jones’s advisory sentencing guidelines range was 30 to 37 months’
    imprisonment. Based on the fact that his crime involved the death of a young child,
    his extensive criminal history, and his three prior felon-in-possession convictions,
    the district court 1 varied upward and sentenced him to 57 months’ imprisonment.
    On appeal, Jones argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable.
    This is not “the unusual case when we reverse a district court sentence . . . as
    substantively unreasonable.” See United States v. Feemster, 
    572 F.3d 455
    , 464 (8th
    Cir. 2009) (en banc). The district court has wide latitude to weigh the 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a) factors. United States v. Stephen, 
    984 F.3d 625
    , 633 (8th Cir. 2021). We
    previously affirmed a much larger upward variance when a defendant’s dangerous
    conduct endangered children. United States v. Godfrey, 
    863 F.3d 1088
    , 1092-94
    (8th Cir. 2017). And we have affirmed substantial upward variances when a
    defendant repeated his prior criminal conduct. See, e.g., United States v. David, 
    682 F.3d 1074
    , 1077-78 (8th Cir. 2012). Although Jones disagrees with how the district
    court weighed the factors, the district court did not abuse its discretion by weighing
    more heavily aggravating factors under § 3553(a) to vary upward. See Feemster,
    
    572 F.3d at 461
    . We therefore affirm Jones’s sentence.
    ______________________________
    1
    The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the
    District of Minnesota.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 22-1654

Filed Date: 3/14/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 3/14/2023