U.S. v. Mzembe

Dist. Ct. did not err in sentencing defendant to 36-year term of incarceration on kidnapping-related charges that was imposed consecutively to unrelated state-court sentence of 62 years on home invasion and other charges. Record showed state-court sentence had been imposed consecutively to defendant’s original 44-year sentence on instant federal charges plus firearm charge that had ultimately been vacated, and Dist. Ct. could properly recognize that consecutive, as opposed to concurrent, sentence treatment was appropriate with respect to instant sentence in view of state-court’s decision to impose consecutive sentence to Dist. Ct.'s original sentence. Moreover, consecutive sentence in instant case was not unreasonable given that both state and federal convictions pertained to violent crimes, and given defendant’s criminal history categories of V and VI at times of his original and second federal sentences. Also, defendant’s request for concurrent sentencing treatment would have reduced consequence of his federal sentence to zero. Fact that combination of both sentences resulted in de facto life sentence did not require different result.