On appeal from The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln ">

Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 11-18-2021

Case Style:

United States of America v. Jack Knight

Case Number: 20-2300

Judge: Per Curiam - Before Colloton, Gruender and Shepherd, Circuit Judges

Court: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit
On appeal from The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln

Plaintiff's Attorney: United States Attorney’s Office

Defendant's Attorney:

St. Louis, MO - Criminal defense Lawyer Directory


St. Louis, MO - Criminal defense lawyer represented defendant charged with assaulting a federal employee.

Upon careful review, we conclude that the district court did not impose a
substantively unreasonable sentence, as the court properly considered the factors listed
in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and did not err in weighing the relevant factors. See United
States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (sentences are reviewed for
substantive reasonableness under deferential abuse of discretion standard; abuse of
discretion occurs when court fails to consider relevant factor, gives significant weight
to improper or irrelevant factor, or commits clear error of judgment in weighing
appropriate factors). Further, the court imposed a sentence below the Guidelines
range. See United States v. McCauley, 715 F.3d 1119, 1127 (8th Cir. 2013) (noting
that when district court has varied below Guidelines range, it is “nearly inconceivable”
that court abused its discretion in not varying downward further).

Outcome: We have also independently reviewed the record under Penson v. Ohio, 488
U.S. 75 (1988), and we find no non-frivolous issues for appeal. Accordingly, we
affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case