Defendant pleaded guilty to being an accessory after the fact to homicide and in a separate case to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. The district court held two sentencing hearings on the same day and imposed consecutive sentences on both convictions. On appeal, defendant challenged the substantive reasonableness of his sentence.
Where the district court adequately considered the statutory sentencing factors and found that defendant’s sentence was supported by factors not accounted for by the sentencing guidelines, the district did not impose a substantively unreasonable sentence.
Judgment is affirmed.
U.S. v. Benson (MLW No. 73499/Case No. 18-2189 & 18-2195 – 5 pages) (U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, per curiam) Appealed from U.S. District Court, District of South Dakota, Viken, J.