United States v. Trevion Dickson

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 25-2011

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Trevion Dickson

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Central

____________

Submitted: August 4, 2026 Filed: August 7, 2026

[Unpublished]

____________

Before GRASZ, ERICKSON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Trevion Dickson appeals the sentence the district court1 imposed after he pled guilty to firearm and drug offenses. He challenges the sentence as substantively unreasonable.

1 The Honorable Brian S. Miller, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Upon careful review, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing Dickson. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461-62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (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); United States v. Mangum, 625 F.3d 466, 469-70 (8th Cir. 2010) (upward variance is reasonable where court “makes an individualized assessment based on facts presented” (cleaned up)); United States v. Cloud, 956 F.3d 985, 988 (8th Cir. 2019) (rejecting argument that district court considered improper factor where it was unclear if district court considered factor at all, and review of record confirmed court did not afford it significant weight). Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________