United States v. David Lemon

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 14a0049n.06
No. 12-2676 FILED
Jan 21, 2014
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellee, )
) ON APPEAL FROM THE
v. ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT
) COURT FOR THE WESTERN
DAVID RYAN LEMON, ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
)
Defendant-Appellant. )
BEFORE: BOGGS, NORRIS, and WHITE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Defendant David Ryan Lemon appeals through counsel the sentence
imposed following his conviction of bank robbery by force or violence. See 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a),
(d).
Lemon robbed a federally insured bank while armed with a knife and a BB gun. The robbery
was captured on videotape, and Lemon confessed to the crime. He was found competent to stand
trial, and a jury found him guilty. After his conviction, Lemon stopped taking necessary medication,
and sentencing was postponed until he regained competency.
Lemon’s presentence report indicated that he has a long history of mental illness and a
history of violent acts related to his condition, including a concealed-weapons conviction for hiding
a butcher knife under his shirt after being spotted cleaning his fingernails with it at a bus station and
an assault conviction for threatening a parking-lot security guard with a knife in order to get the
guard’s gun. After reviewing the presentence report, Lemon added to it a statement that he
No. 12-2676
United States v. Lemon
committed the bank robbery because he remembered that he had been sexually abused when he was
18, began to think that his abuser was going to find him, and wanted to be put in prison, out of the
abuser’s reach.
At sentencing, defense counsel argued for a downward departure or variance from the
calculated guidelines range of 78 to 97 months based on Lemon’s mental illness. The district court
denied the request and sentenced Lemon to 78 months, at the bottom of the guidelines range. On
appeal, Lemon argues that the sentence is substantively unreasonable because it does not take into
consideration the severity of his mental illness.
We review the reasonableness of a sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). A sentence within the guidelines range is presumptively
reasonable. United States v. Vonner, 516 F.3d 382, 389 (6th Cir. 2008) (en banc). Lemon argues
that his sentence is substantively unreasonable because the district court failed to consider Lemon’s
“history and characteristics”—his mental-health issues—and gave unreasonable weight to the
“nature and circumstances” of Lemon’s offense—the bank robbery. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1);
see also United States v. Borho, 485 F.3d 904, 908 (6th Cir. 2007). However, review of the
transcript reveals that the district court expressly considered Lemon’s mental-health history and
characteristics but found that factor outweighed by the need to protect the public. Because the
district court considered the pertinent § 3553 factors and gave a satisfactory explanation for the
sentence imposed, Lemon has not rebutted the presumption that his within-guidelines sentence was
reasonable. See United States v. Lapsins, 570 F.3d 758, 774 (6th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, the
district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
-2-