United States v. Corley

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT October 23, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30281 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JOHN B. CORLEY, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:05-CR-50083 Before GARWOOD, CLEMENT and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* John B. Corley appeals the sentence imposed following his post-Booker conviction of theft of firearms that were transported in interstate commerce, transporting stolen firearms in interstate commerce, possession of stolen firearms that were transported in interstate commerce, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Corley argues for the first time on appeal that the non- * 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 R. 47.5 the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. Guidelines sentence imposed by the district court was unreasonable because the district court based its decision on general dissatisfaction with the Guidelines. He also argues that the Guidelines adequately accounted for his criminal behavior. The record indicates that the district court correctly calculated the Guidelines range and used the Guidelines as a frame of reference.** See United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir. 2006). The district court, troubled by Corley’s extensive criminal history (29 criminal history points) and the facts of his offenses, articulated reasons that were consistent with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) for imposing a non-Guidelines sentence. See id. Moreover, given the seriousness of Corley’s criminal history and offense conduct as found by the district court, the extent of the deviation was not unreasonable. See United States v. Smith, 417 F.3d 483, 491-93 and n.40-42 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 713 (2005). Corley fails to meet his burden of showing that the district court’s non-Guidelines sentence, which was imposed after United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), was error, plain or otherwise. See United States v. Jones, 444 F.3d 430, 434-36 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S.Ct. 2958 (2006). AFFIRMED. ** It does not reflect any general dissatisfaction with the offense Guidelines. 2