The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
07-10531•Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Robert Eon Marshall, also known as Bruce Charles Harmon
07-10531Court of Appeals for the Fifth CircuitApr 17, 2008
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion
should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-10531
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
ROBERT EON MARSHALL, also known as Bruce Charles Harmon
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:06-CR-197-ALL
Before JOLLY, DAVIS, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Robert Eon Marshall appeals the 120-month sentence imposed following
his guilty plea conviction for mail fraud. Marshall argues that the district court
abused its discretion in imposing an upward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G
§ 4A1.3(a) based on an under-representation of his criminal history and a
likelihood of recidivism. He contends that the district court’s reasons for
upwardly departing are inadequate and do not support a departure under
§ 4A1.3(a).
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 17, 2008
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
-- 1 of 2 --
No. 07-10531
2
“An upward departure by a district court is not an abuse of discretion if
the court’s reasons for departing 1) advance the objectives set forth in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a)(2) and 2) are justified by the facts of the case.” United States v.
Zuniga-Peralta, 442 F.3d 345, 347 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2954 (2006)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Marshall’s upward departure
meets those criteria. The district court considered the factors of § 3553(a) and
articulated the objectives served in imposing an upward departure. Marshall’s
similar prior offenses, his disregard for court orders, and the use of aliases
signify a likelihood of recidivism. The district court did not abuse its discretion.
See Zuniga-Peralta, 442 F.3d at 347.
Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.