USA v. Jaddier Thomas Sanchez

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eleventh Circuit
____________________
No. 23-10414
Non-Argument Calendar
____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JADDIER THOMAS SANCHEZ,
Defendant- Appellant.
____________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
D.C. Docket No. 0:21-cr-60051-RAR-1
____________________
USCA11 Case: 23-10414 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Page: 1 of 4

-- 1 of 4 --

2 Opinion of the Court 23-10414
Before G RANT, BRASHER , and ABUDU, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Jaddier Sanchez appeals his 300-months’ imprisonment for
kidnapping three people with a firearm. Because we do not find
this sentence substantively unreasonable, we affirm.
I.
Jaddier Sanchez has a long and well-documented history of
violence and violating the law. He has pleaded guilty and received
jail time for aggravated stalking, retail theft, driving with a
suspended license, and violating an injunction for protection
against domestic violence. And he has been previously convicted
of robbery, for which he served a 15-year prison sentence.1
About six months after being released from custody for his
robbery conviction, Sanchez committed the present offenses. He
drove to his ex-girlfriend’s house in the middle of the night and
kidnapped her and her parents at gunpoint. He demanded money
from the parents and forced all three into a truck, threatening them
multiple times with his firearm. He later stopped, forced the
parents out of the car, tied them up, and left them on the side of
the road. He then drove his ex-girlfriend from Florida to northern
Virginia, where he was eventually arrested.
1 While in prison for robbery, Sanchez received 65 disciplinary actions against
him for various infractions, both violent and nonviolent.
USCA11 Case: 23-10414 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Page: 2 of 4

-- 2 of 4 --

23-10414 Opinion of the Court 3
Sanchez pleaded guilty to three counts of kidnapping and
one count of possession of a firearm and ammunition by a
convicted felon. The presentencing investigation report calculated
a Guidelines range of 168- to 210-months’ imprisonment, but it
also recognized that Sanchez’s extensive criminal history “may
warrant departure and/or variance.” The government moved for
upward variance and/or departure, and the district court sentenced
Sanchez to 300-months’ imprisonment, 90 months more than the
recommended Guidelines range. Sanchez appeals, arguing that his
sentence is substantively unreasonable.
II.
We will not consider a sentence substantively unreasonable
unless “we are left with the definite and firm conviction that the
district court committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the
18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors” to arrive at a sentence outside the
Guidelines range. United States v. Riley, 995 F.3d 1272, 1278 (11th
Cir. 2021) (alteration adopted) (quotation omitted). These factors
include “the nature of the circumstances of the offense and the
history and characteristics of the defendant.” 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a)(1). Courts may also consider the need for the sentence
“‘to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for
the law,’ ‘to provide just punishment for the offense,’ ‘to afford
adequate deterrence to criminal conduct,’ and ‘to protect the
public from further crimes of the defendant.’” Riley, 995 F.3d at
1278–79 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2)). District courts have
discretion in weighing these factors, and that discretion is
USCA11 Case: 23-10414 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Page: 3 of 4

-- 3 of 4 --

4 Opinion of the Court 23-10414
“particularly pronounced when it comes to weighing criminal
history.” Id. at 1279.
The district court’s decision in this case to impose a sentence
90 months over the Guidelines range was not substantively
unreasonable. The court considered Sanchez’s present crime and
criminal history to conclude that he is a violent, repeat offender. It
found that Sanchez’s criminal history was “woefully
underrepresented” in the Guidelines calculation, and that “a
stronger sentence is necessary to protect the public from his future
crimes.” These are all factors that we have said can be used to grant
a sentence above the Guidelines range, and we do not find that the
district court gave any unreasonable weight to these factors. See id.
at 1278–81. We AFFIRM.
USCA11 Case: 23-10414 Document: 50-1 Date Filed: 03/20/2024 Page: 4 of 4

-- 4 of 4 --