United States of America v. Dennis Wayne Hager

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 24-1384
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Dennis Wayne Hager
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids
____________
Submitted: February 10, 2025
Filed: May 15, 2025
[Unpublished]
____________
Before SMITH, KELLY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Dennis Wayne Hager pleaded guilty to two counts of distribution of a
controlled substance, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A), one count of possession
with intent to distribute a controlled substance, id., and one count of possession of a
firearm by a prohibited person, 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), (g)(3), and 924(a)(2). The

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
district court1 sentenced him to 235 months in prison, the bottom of his Guidelines
range.
Hager argues that the district court gave too much weight to his criminal
history and offense conduct and not enough weight to other facts—the firearm was
only present in his house, not used in the drug transactions; he was a mid-level
dealer, not a street dealer; he suffers from substance abuse issues; and he is older
and has health issues. But the district court considered those mitigating
circumstances against aggravating ones, including Hager’s extensive criminal
history, his distribution of “very large quantities of methamphetamine for large
amounts of cash,” that he was arrested and continued selling drugs while on
probation, and that—at age 64—he had not aged out of criminal behavior.
That the district court weighed the aggravating circumstances more heavily
than Hager would have liked does not mean his sentence is substantively
unreasonable. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (factors to be considered in imposing
sentence); United States v. Farmer, 647 F.3d 1175, 1179 (8th Cir. 2011) (“Simply
because the district court weighed relevant factors . . . more heavily than [the
defendant] would prefer does not mean the district court abused its discretion.”).
Affirmed.
______________________________
1 The Honorable C.J. Williams, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
the Northern District of Iowa.

-- 2 of 2 --