Scribd
Upload
117 views4 pages

Legal Appeal: Frazier's Sentence Affirmed

1) Kevin Labricio Frazier pled guilty to armed bank robbery and related firearm charges for robbing a bank in North Carolina. 2) He was sentenced to 46 months in prison for the bank robbery charge, which was at the top of the guidelines range. 3) On appeal, Frazier argued his sentence was too long given his lesser role in the robbery, but the appeals court affirmed, finding the district court properly considered Frazier's risk of recidivism in light of his committing the robbery shortly after release from a prior sentence.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
117 views4 pages

Legal Appeal: Frazier's Sentence Affirmed

1) Kevin Labricio Frazier pled guilty to armed bank robbery and related firearm charges for robbing a bank in North Carolina. 2) He was sentenced to 46 months in prison for the bank robbery charge, which was at the top of the guidelines range. 3) On appeal, Frazier argued his sentence was too long given his lesser role in the robbery, but the appeals court affirmed, finding the district court properly considered Frazier's risk of recidivism in light of his committing the robbery shortly after release from a prior sentence.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-4736

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KEVIN LABRICIO FRAZIER,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (4:11-cr-00113-F-3)

Submitted:

May 30, 2013

Decided:

June 6, 2013

Before DIAZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank A. Abrams, LAW OFFICE OF FRANK ABRAMS, PLLC, Asheville,


North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States
Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant
United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:
On

March

7,

2011,

Kevin

Labricio

Frazier

and

his

brother robbed a branch of the First South Bank in Greenville,


North Carolina.
aiding

and

Frazier pled guilty to armed bank robbery and

abetting,

in

violation

of

18

U.S.C.

2113(a),

2113(d), and 2 (2006) (Count Three), and using or carrying a


firearm

during

possessing

and

in

firearm

relation
in

to

furtherance

crime

of

thereof,

violence,

and

aiding

and
and

abetting, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(A) and 2 (2006)


(Count Four).

The district court sentenced Frazier to forty-six

months imprisonment on the bank robbery charge, the top of the


Guidelines

range,

to

be

followed

by

eighty-four

months

imprisonment on the firearm offense, for a total sentence of 130


months in

prison.

Frazier

timely

appeals,

arguing

that

the

forty-six-month sentence he received on the armed robbery count


is

substantively

unreasonable,

because

it

is

greater

than

necessary to satisfy the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) (2006).


This

court

reviews

sentence

for

reasonableness,

applying a deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.


United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).

Gall v.

Where, as here, the

defendant does not challenge the procedural reasonableness of


his

sentence,

we

review

the

sentence

only

for

substantive

reasonableness, applying the abuse-of-discretion standard.


United States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 575 (4th Cir. 2010).
2

Id.;
The

sentence

imposed

must

be

sufficient,

but

not

greater

than

necessary, to comply with the purposes [of sentencing].


U.S.C.

3553(a).

reasonableness,
circumstances.

In
we

reviewing
examine[]

sentence
the

for

18

substantive

totality

of

the

United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza, 597 F.3d 212,

216 (4th Cir. 2010).

If the sentence is within the properly

calculated Guidelines range, this court applies a presumption on


appeal that the sentence is substantively reasonable.
216-17.

Id. at

Such a presumption is rebutted only by showing that

the sentence is unreasonable when measured against the 3553(a)


factors.

United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379

(4th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted).


Frazier

argues

that,

under

the

totality

of

the

circumstances, he should have received a sentence at the bottom


of the Guidelines range on Count Three, primarily relying on his
claim that his brother had a greater role in the robbery and
that

the

charges

against

his

brothers

separate armed robbery were dismissed. *

co-defendant

in

[D]istrict courts have

extremely broad discretion when determining the weight to be


given each of the 3553(a) factors. United States v. Jeffery,
631 F.3d 669, 679 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 132 S. Ct. 187
*

Frazier was not charged in the February 2, 2011 armed


robbery, which occurred while he was in state custody serving a
sentence on unrelated charges.

(2011).

In imposing a sentence at the top of the Guidelines

range on Count Three, the district court focused on Fraziers


risk of recidivism, emphasizing that he committed the robbery
only a week after his release from custody on a state sentence.
We conclude that Frazier has failed to rebut the presumption of
reasonableness accorded his within-Guidelines sentence.
Accordingly,
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

we

affirm

argument

adequately

Fraziers

because

presented

in

the
the

sentence.
facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

You might also like