United States v. Moore, 071211 FED8, 10-2473

• Opinion Judge: PER CURIAM.
• Party Name: United States of America, Appellee, v. Kendrick Antion Moore, Appellant.
• Judge Panel: Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
• Case Date: July 12, 2011
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals, U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

United States of America, Appellee,

v.

Kendrick Antion Moore, Appellant.

No. 10-2473

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

July 12, 2011

UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: May 9, 2011

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kendrick Moore pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and was sentenced to the statutory maximum of 120 months' imprisonment. Moore's sentence fell within the sentencing range of 100-120 months calculated pursuant to the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on his offense level of 26 and criminal history category of V. Moore challenges his sentence, arguing the district court¹ was improperly influenced by its familiarity with the Arkansas criminal system and its perception that the system, which allows for early release of some inmates on parole, is too lenient. Finding no error, we affirm.

We review the district court's sentence under a deferential abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 56 (2007). "A district court abuses its discretion when it (1) fails to consider a relevant factor that should have received significant weight; (2) gives significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor; or (3) considers only the appropriate factors but in weighing those factors commits a clear error of judgment." United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461 (8th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted) (en banc). Sentences within the advisory guidelines range are presumed reasonable. United States v. Sandoval-Sianuqui, 632 F.3d 438, 444 (8th Cir. 2011).

In fashioning a sentence, the court must impose a sentence which is "sufficient, but not greater than necessary" to meet the following statutory goals:

(A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense;

(B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct;

(C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and

(D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner.

18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).

Moore's charge regarding the district court's consideration of an improper factor is premised on the following part of the court's sentencing colloquy:

I'm faced with the facts. I'm faced with a 1995 robbery, theft of property. And that's in Pulaski County Circuit Court. I'm faced with manufacturing and delivery and possession of a controlled substance, and possession of a controlled...