United States of America v. Todd Skalberg

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 23-3744
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Todd Skalberg
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Eastern
____________
Submitted: October 21, 2024
Filed: March 19, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SHEPHERD, KELLY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Todd Skalberg received a 262-month prison sentence after he pleaded guilty
to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine for mailing drugs from California to
Iowa. See 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A)(viii), 846. He claims that the sentence
is procedurally flawed and substantively unreasonable.

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
We conclude otherwise. Skalberg received a sentence within the advisory
range despite having several prior drug convictions, both state and federal. Add the
fact that he was on state parole when he mailed the drugs, and the district court1 had
good reason to impose a sentence above the mandatory minimum of 180 months in
prison. See United States v. Fitzpatrick, 943 F.3d 838, 840–41 (8th Cir. 2019).
When determining the sentence, the district court carefully considered the
statutory sentencing factors. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); United States v. Bridges, 569
F.3d 374, 378–79 (8th Cir. 2009). It discussed a host of mitigating facts, such as
Skalberg’s traumatic childhood, current age, and acceptance of responsibility. None,
in its view, outweighed his criminal history and the fact that he “chose[] to engage
in drug trafficking” despite “know[ing] the consequences.” See Fitzpatrick, 943
F.3d at 840 (explaining that the district court has discretion to “weigh” some factors
“more heavily than others”). Neither procedural error nor substantive
unreasonableness is present on this record, which shows thorough consideration of
each of his arguments at sentencing. See United States v. Feemster, 572 F.3d 455,
461 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing for an abuse of discretion).
We accordingly affirm the judgment of the district court.
______________________________
1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, then District Judge, now Chief Judge, United
States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.

-- 2 of 2 --