United States v. Deandre Crockett

── United States v. Deandre Crockett ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Date: April 23, 2026 Category: General NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 26a0185n.06 Case No. 25-3486 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED ) Apr 23, 2026 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, KELLY L. STEPHENS, Clerk ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED v. ) STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR ) THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF DEANDRE CROCKETT, ) OHIO Defendant-Appellant. ) ) OPINION Before: SUTTON, Chief Judge; CLAY and MURPHY, Circuit Judges. SUTTON, Chief Judge. Deandre Crockett pleaded guilty to distributing fentanyl and methamphetamine. The Sentencing Guidelines recommended a sentence of 100 to 125 months’ imprisonment. The district court sentenced Crockett to 131 months. Crockett appeals his sentence as substantively unreasonable. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm. In July 2024, state law enforcement learned from a confidential informant that Crockett was peddling drugs. The police directed the informant to set up a series of controlled buys with Crockett. Over the next three weeks, Crockett met with the informant five times, selling a total of 110 grams of methamphetamine and 20 grams of fentanyl. During the last of these buys, Crockett met with the informant, went into an apartment, and returned with fentanyl. Two days later, state law enforcement and U.S. Marshals executed a search warrant at the apartment. They found No. 25-3486, United States v. Crockett fentanyl, cocaine, and marijuana stashed throughout the apartment plus cash, several plastic bags, and a digital scale. A grand jury charged Crockett with two counts of distributing methamphetamine and four counts of distributing fentanyl. Crockett pleaded guilty to all six counts. At sentencing, the district court calculated Crockett’s advisory guidelines range as 100 to 125 months. The court acknowledged that the average sentence nationally for drug distribution defendants with Crockett’s criminal history and offense level was 91 months. But the court did not consider Crockett to be an average defendant, pointing to the large quantity of drugs sold, the dangerous nature of methamphetamine and fentanyl, and Crockett’s extensive and violent uncharged criminal conduct. The court reasoned that Crockett’s conduct deserved a sentence well above the national average. The court also determined that an upward variance was appropriate because Crockett had fought with another prisoner in jail while awaiting sentencing. The court sentenced Crockett to 131 months. On appeal, Crockett challenges his sentence as substantively unreasonable, in essence claiming that it is “too long.” United States v. Rayyan, 885 F.3d 436, 442 (6th Cir. 2018). In the context of this “highly deferential review,” we ask whether the court exceeded its discretion by placing “too much” emphasis or “too little” emphasis on the relevant § 3553(a) factors: the nature of the offense, the defendant’s history and characteristics, the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities, and the sentence’s deterrent, punitive, incapacitating, and rehabilitative functions. Id.; 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). While we may consider “the extent of any variance from the Guidelines,” we “must give due de