United States v. Nathan Stone

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 21-2088

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Nathan Stone,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

____________

Submitted: February 22, 2022 Filed: February 28, 2022

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Nathan Stone appeals the sentence imposed by the district court1 after he pleaded guilty to a drug offense. Stone argues that the district court abused its

1 The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the Western District of Arkansas.

discretion by imposing a substantively unreasonable sentence after giving insufficient weight to mitigating factors such as his drug addiction and the nonviolent nature of his offense.

We review the reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential abuse-ofdiscretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). We conclude that Stone’s sentence was not substantively unreasonable, as there is no indication that the court overlooked a relevant factor, gave significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the relevant factors. See United States v. Pickar, 666 F.3d 1167, 1169 (8th Cir. 2012). The court made an individualized assessment based on the facts presented in its consideration of the factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834, 849 (8th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________