UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-5092
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
VINCENTE ROMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief
District Judge. (5:05-cr-174-1)
Submitted: September 26, 2006 Decided: September 28, 2006
Before WIDENER and WILKINSON, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Devon L. Donahue,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes,
Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Vincente Roman appeals his eighteen-month term of
imprisonment imposed after the district court revoked his
supervised release. He argues that the sentence is unreasonable
because it was higher than the applicable advisory sentencing range
of six to twelve months pursuant to policy statements in Chapter 7
of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual. Pursuant to United
States v. Crudup, ___ F.3d ___, ___, 2006 WL 2243586, at *3 (4th
Cir. Aug. 7, 2006), revocation sentences are reviewed to determine
whether they are “plainly unreasonable” with regard to the 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors applicable to these sentences. We find
that Roman’s sentence is not plainly unreasonable, because the
district court sufficiently stated a proper basis for its
conclusion that Roman should be sentenced to a lengthier sentence
than one within the advisory range. We therefore affirm Roman’s
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
- 2 -