United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 20, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-41275
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
EDUARDO RIVERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:05-CR-118-ALL
--------------------
Before STEWART, DENNIS, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eduardo Rivero was convicted of one charge of possession of
more than 50 grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute
and sentenced to serve 292 months in prison and a five-year term
of supervised release. Rivero argues that his sentence is
unreasonable and that 21 U.S.C. § 841 is unconstitutional under
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000).
Rivero contends that his sentence is unreasonable because
the district court relied too heavily upon the Sentencing
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-41275
-2-
Guidelines and failed to give due consideration to the sentencing
factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). We presume that the
sentence is reasonable because it falls within the applicable
guidelines sentencing range. See United States v. Alonzo, 435
F.3d 551, 553 (5th Cir. 2006). Rivero has not shown error in
connection with the district court’s decision to sentence him
within that range. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519
(5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). Further, the
record shows that the district court gave sufficient weight to
the § 3553(a) factors at sentencing. See id. Accordingly,
Rivero’s argument that his sentence is unreasonable is
unavailing. Rivero’s contention that § 841 is unconstitutional
is, as he concedes, foreclosed. See United States v. Slaughter,
238 F.3d 580, 582 (5th Cir. 2000).
Rivero has shown no error in the district court’s judgment.
The judgment is AFFIRMED.