Case Explained: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAVION J. SHEPHERD ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-17 The Sixth Circuit affirmed Davion Shepherd’s 167-month prison sentence for federal drug offenses, rejecting his claims that the sentence was substantively and procedurally unreasonable. The court applied an abuse of discretion standard to review the substantive reasonableness of the within-guidelines sentence, noting a presumption of reasonableness under *United States v. Vonner*. The court held that Shepherd’s argument regarding the sentence exceeding the national average failed because the district court’s adherence to the Sentencing Guidelines inherently addressed the need to avoid unwarranted disparities under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). Regarding procedural reasonableness, the court applied plain error review because Shepherd had not raised his specific arguments in the district court. The court rejected his claim that the district court improperly considered his overdue child-support payments, ruling that sentencing courts may consider a defendant’s family circumstances and history under *Pepper v. United States*, especially when the defendant himself raised his relationship with his children as a mitigating factor. Additionally, the court dismissed Shepherd’s argument regarding a miscalculation of drug quantity in the presentence investigation report, finding that while an error existed, it did not alter the applicable sentencing range and thus did not affect his substantial rights. Consequently, the district court’s judgment remains in effect, and Shepherd must serve the imposed sentence. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.