United States of America v. Marquasia N. Davis, also known as Quay

United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 25-2164
___________________________
United States of America
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
Marquasia N. Davis, also known as Quay
Defendant - Appellant
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri - Cape Girardeau
____________
Submitted: April 17, 2026
Filed: June 8, 2026
[Unpublished]
____________
Before LOKEN, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Marquasia Davis managed drivers and laundered money for an organization
trafficking in drugs. After she pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy count, see 21

-- 1 of 2 --

-2-
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846, the district court1 varied downward to a
sentence of 180 months in prison. She argues it should have been even lower.
We conclude otherwise. The record shows that the district court sufficiently
considered the statutory sentencing factors, see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and did not rely
on an improper factor or commit a clear error in judgment. See United States v.
Feemster, 572 F.3d 455, 461–62 (8th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (reviewing for an abuse
of discretion). Among those it considered were her troubled upbringing and lack of
criminal history. And although her boyfriend may have coerced her into joining the
scheme, her extensive involvement was the reason she did not receive a lower
sentence. See United States v. McKanry, 628 F.3d 1010, 1022 (8th Cir. 2011)
(explaining that “it is nearly inconceivable” that a district court abused its discretion
by refusing to vary downward even more (citation omitted)).
As she points out, she received a smaller downward variance than her co-
conspirators, which may have led to a sentence above the national median for
defendants with similar characteristics. But the court relied on its own assessment
of the facts and circumstances and tailored the sentence to fit them. See United
States v. Dickson, 127 F.4th 722, 730 (8th Cir. 2025) (noting that “relief based on a
comparison to co-conspirators is . . . unusual” (citation omitted)); United States v.
Lemicy, 122 F.4th 298, 312 (8th Cir. 2024) (“General comparison based on the
Judiciary Sentencing Information table . . . does not demonstrate an abuse of the
district court’s sentencing discretion.”). We accordingly affirm the judgment of the
district court.
______________________________
1 The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States District Judge for
the Eastern District of Missouri.

-- 2 of 2 --