Vacated by Supreme Court, January 14, 2008
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4835
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DEXTER THEATRA THOMAS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
Chief District Judge. (CR-05-26)
Submitted: June 22, 2006 Decided: June 26, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John J. Korzen, Kernersville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna
Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Sandra J. Hairston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Dextra Theatra Thomas pled guilty, pursuant to a written
plea agreement, to one count of distributing crack cocaine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2000). Thomas was sentenced
following the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker,
543 U.S. 220 (2005). The district court applied the holding of
Booker and sentenced Thomas to 270 months imprisonment. On appeal,
Thomas claims that he was sentenced in violation of Booker because
his sentence was unreasonable and the district court failed to
fully account for all the factors enumerated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)
(2000). We affirm.
After the Supreme Court’s decision in Booker, a
sentencing court is no longer bound by the range prescribed by the
sentencing guidelines. See United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540,
546 (4th Cir. 2005). However, in determining a sentence post-
Booker, sentencing courts are still required to calculate and
consider the applicable guideline range as well as the factors set
forth in 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000& Supp. 2006). Id. If
the sentence imposed is within the properly calculated guideline
range, it is presumptively reasonable. United States v. Green, 436
F.3d 449, 456 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 74 U.S.L.W. 3654 (U.S. May
22, 2006) (No. 05-10474).
Thomas’ sentence was both within the guideline range of
262-327 months and within the statutory maximum of life
- 2 -
imprisonment. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) (2000). Because the district
court appropriately treated the guidelines as advisory, and
properly calculated and considered the guideline range and the
relevant § 3553(a) factors, we find the sentence reasonable. See
United States v. Eura, 440 F.3d 625, 632 (4th Cir. 2006) (holding
that, to establish reasonableness of a sentence, a district court
need not explicitly discuss every § 3553(a) factor on the record).
Accordingly, we affirm Thomas’ sentence. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would not
aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -