11th Cir.

United States v. Devilbiss

June 29, 2026 ·3:23-cr-00153-WWB-LLL-1 ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a fifty-one-month sentence for a defendant convicted of conspiring to create and distribute animal crush videos. The court rejected arguments that the district court erred in applying a role enhancement or in finding the sentence substantively unreasonable.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:24

Background

Nicole Danielle Devilbiss was indicted for conspiracy to create and distribute animal crush videos in violation of federal statutes. She pleaded guilty and was sentenced to fifty-one months in prison after the district court applied a four-level enhancement for her role as an organizer or leader of the criminal activity. Devilbiss appealed, arguing the enhancement was inapplicable and that her sentence was substantively unreasonable.

The court’s reasoning

The Eleventh Circuit applied a two-step process to review the sentence. First, the court reviewed the application of the role enhancement under the Sentencing Guidelines. It found that Devilbiss exercised decision-making authority, recruited accomplices, and controlled access to the Telegram group, satisfying the factors for an organizer or leader. The court held that her title as administrator was not dispositive but was supported by her actual control over participants and content. Second, the court reviewed the substantive reasonableness of the sentence. It found the district court properly considered the nature of the offense, the defendant’s history, and the need for deterrence. The court noted that the district court did not rely on the public petition submitted with the presentence report, and the sentence fell within the correct guidelines range.

What it means going forward

The decision reinforces that control over a digital platform used for criminal conspiracy can support a role enhancement even if the defendant shares administrative duties with others. It also clarifies that a sentencing court may consider the nature of the offense as deplorable without impermissibly relying on public outrage.