United States v. Arthur Young

── United States v. Arthur Young ── Case No.: 25-11552 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: March 30, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-11552 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 03/30/2026 Page: 1 of 17 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-11552 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTHUR GENE YOUNG, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D.C. Docket No. 3:23-cr-00010-TCB-RGV-1 ____________________ Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Arthur Young appeals his 168-month sentence for his con- viction of a single count of felon in possession of a firearm, in vio- lation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). USCA11 Case: 25-11552 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 03/30/2026 Page: 2 of 17 2 Opinion of the Court 25-11552 After review, 1 we affirm Young’s sentence. I. DISCUSSION Young raises five arguments on appeal regarding his sen- tence. He argues that (1) the district court erred by imposing a two-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1) for possession of three or more firearms; (2) the district court erred by imposing a four-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) for possession of a firearm in connection with an- other felony offense; (3) the district court erred by imposing a two-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for ob- struction of justice based on false statements made to a probation officer during a presentence interview; (4) the district court erred by imposing a two-level sentencing enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 for recklessly creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person in the course of fleeing from law enforcement officers; and (5) the district court abused its discretion by imposing a substantively unreasonable sentence. We address each argument in turn. 1 “We review a district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guidelines and application of the Guidelines to the facts de novo, and we review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error.” United States v. Dimitrovski, 782 F.3d 622, 628 (11th Cir. 2015). “We review the substantive reasonableness of a sen- tence for an abuse of discretion.” United States v. Osorio-Moreno, 814 F.3d 1282, 1287 (11th Cir. 2016). USCA11 Case: 25-11552 Document: 32-1 Date Filed: 03/30/2026 Page: 3 of 17 25-11552 Opinion of the Court 3 A. Possession of Three Firearms Under § 2K2.1(b)(1), a district court must enhance a defend- ant’s offense level by two points if “the offense involved” between three and seven firearms. U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A). The district court imposed the § 2K2.1(b)(1) enhancement based on (1) the firearm that Young possessed at the time of his arrest for the underlying offense in May 2023, (2) a second firearm that Young unlawfully possessed in February 2021, and (3) a third firearm that Young unlawfully possessed in March 2021. Yo