Where the defendant discharged a firearm during a bank robbery, an above-guideline sentence was not unreasonable.
“The district court considered the factors in § 3553(a) and adequately articulated its decision to impose an above-guideline sentence. Specifically, it explained that ‘the nature and circumstances of this offense are by every measure horrific,’ and that the nature of the crime was not sufficiently accounted for by the guidelines. It also emphasized that Abebe carried two firearms during the robbery, fired his handgun ‘twice, once to scare the wits out of people, and the other to come within a hair’s breadth of taking a life,’ terrorized the bank’s employees and customers, forcing them ‘to lie down on the ground and . . . wonder[ ] if they were drawing their last breath,’ and placed people at risk. Although Abebe contends that a within-guideline sentence would have kept him in jail until his early-60s and thus that his above-guideline sentence is not necessary to protect the public from him committing more crimes, we find no abuse of discretion in sentencing him to 300 months of imprisonment. Cf. United States v. Ellis, 622 F.3d 784, 800 (7th Cir. 2010) (upholding a 90- month sentence where the applicable guideline range was 46 to 57 months); United States v. McKinney, 543 F.3d 911, 912, 913-14 (7th Cir. 2008) (upholding a 293-month sentence where the applicable guideline range was 188 to 235 months).”
10-3966 U.S. v. Abebe
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Barker, J., Flaum, J.