United States v. Mark Lewis , 547 F. App'x 203 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-6798
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARK MCGARRETT LEWIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:09-cr-00949-RBH-1)
Submitted: November 21, 2013 Decided: November 25, 2013
Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender,
Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles,
United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant United
States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Mark McGarrett Lewis appeals from the 74-month
sentence imposed upon resentencing under the Fair Sentencing
Act. He contends that the sentence is unreasonable because the
district court denied his request for a variance based on his
post-sentencing rehabilitation without addressing how Lewis’s
rehabilitation efforts impacted the factors in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) (2012). We affirm.
We have reviewed Lewis’s sentence and conclude that
the sentence imposed was reasonable. See Gall v. United States,
552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. Llamas, 599 F.3d 381,
387 (4th Cir. 2010). The district court followed the necessary
procedural steps in sentencing Lewis. The court properly
calculated and considered the applicable Guidelines range, and
appropriately treated the Sentencing Guidelines as advisory. We
conclude that the district court appropriately considered and
rejected Lewis’s request for a variant sentence in light of the
§ 3553(a) factors and Lewis’s individual characteristics and
history, sufficiently explained the reasons for the sentence,
and did not abuse its discretion in imposing the chosen
sentence. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 41; United States v. Allen, 491
F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007) (applying appellate presumption of
reasonableness to within-Guidelines sentence).
2
Accordingly, we affirm Lewis’s 74-month sentence. We
deny Lewis’s motion for a transcript at government expense and
his motion for leave to file a supplemental brief. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3