TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

United States v. Daniel McNeal

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Daniel McNEAL, Also Known as Diamond, Also Known as Daddy, Appellant

United States v. McNeal, 301 F. App'x 573 (8th Cir. 2008)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 4, 2008
Docket
No. 07-3640
Judges
Melloy, Colloton, Shepherd
Citations
301 F. App'x 573
Status
Unpublished

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Daniel McNeal pleaded guilty to sex trafficking of a minor, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591 , and transporting a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423 (a). Determining that he qualified as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4Bl.l(a) and that a downward departure was not warranted, the district court 1

sentenced McNeal to a within-Guidelines-range sentence of 293 months in prison. McNeal appeals, arguing that the court did not properly consider the nature and circumstances of his offenses or his history and characteristics.

Contrary to this argument, the record reflects that the district court made “an individualized assessment based on the facts presented,” specifically addressing all of McNeal’s proffered information in its consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a) sentencing factors, and we conclude that the sentence was not unreasonable.

See Gall v. United States, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 586, 597 , 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007) (in reviewing sentence for abuse of discretion, appeals court must first ensure there was no significant procedural error, and then *574 assess substantive reasonableness of sentence);

United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997, 1004 (8th Cir.2005) (listing circumstances that may warrant finding of abuse of discretion).

Accordingly, we affirm the sentence. We deny McNeal’s motions to expand the record and to file a pro se brief supplementing his counsel’s brief, see United States v. Clark, 409 F.3d 1039 , 1041 n. 2 (8th Cir.2005).

1

. The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2009: 120092026peak 2009 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. Jordan573 F.3d 586 (8th Cir. 2009)

Most recent

  1. United States v. Jordan573 F.3d 586 (8th Cir. 2009)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007) 19,221
United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d 997 (8th Cir. 2005) 493
United States v. Clark, 409 F.3d 1039 (8th Cir. 2005) 19

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list