United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 21, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-31027
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
DAVID BRIAN PUGH,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 03-CR-60018-ALL
--------------------
Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
David Brian Pugh pleaded guilty to one conspiracy charge and
one fraud charge. The district court upwardly departed at
sentencing and sentenced Pugh to 96 months in prison and a three-
year term of supervised release. Pugh now appeals his sentence,
arguing only that the extent of the district court’s departure
was unreasonable. Because Pugh challenges only the extent of the
district court’s departure, we need not analyze the recent
changes to review of upward departures set out in amended 18
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 03-31027
-2-
U.S.C. § 3742(e). See United States v. Lee, 385 F.3d 315, 326-29
(5th Cir. 2004). Rather, we need only consider whether the
extent of the departure was reasonable. See Williams v. United
States, 503 U.S. 193, 203 (1992); United States v. Ashburn, 38
F.3d 803, 807 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc).
A review of this court’s jurisprudence controverts Pugh’s
arguments and shows that the extent of the district court’s
departure, although substantial, was not unreasonable. See
United States v. Daughenbaugh, 49 F.3d 171, 173-74 (5th Cir.
1995); Ashburn, 38 F.3d at 806; United States v. Rosogie, 21 F.3d
632, 633 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, there is no abuse of
discretion, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.