United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 15, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-30548
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KEVIN RAY HOWARD,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 2:03-CR-20053
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Kevin Ray Howard pleaded guilty to an indictment charging
him with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Howard was
sentenced to an 84-month term of imprisonment and to a three-year
period of supervised release. Howard gave timely notice of his
appeal.
Howard contends that the district court’s sentence was not
reasonable because it was two times longer than the maximum
sentence under the advisory guideline range and because it is not
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-30548
-2-
supported by the district court’s stated reasons. After United
States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), appellate courts
ordinarily review sentences for reasonableness. United States
v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 706 (5th Cir. 2006). The district
court’s reasons for imposing a non-Guideline sentence did not
fail to account for a significant factor or give significant
weight to an irrelevant or improper factor. See id. at 708. The
sentence did not represent a “clear error of judgment in
balancing the sentencing factors.” See id. Accordingly, the
judgment is AFFIRMED.