United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 2, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-20393
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
OSCAR RENE ROMERO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:04-CR-243
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Oscar Rene Romero
preserves for further review his contention that his sentence is
unreasonable because this court’s post-Booker** rulings have
effectively reinstated the mandatory Sentencing Guideline regime
condemned in Booker. Romero concedes that his argument is
foreclosed by United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005), and its progeny, which have
outlined this court’s methodology for reviewing sentences for
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
**
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).
No. 06-20393
-2-
reasonableness. Romero also preserves for further review his
contention that his sentence is unreasonable because of the
court’s refusal to consider his postsentencing rehabilitation.
Romero concedes that this argument is foreclosed by United States
v. Tzep-Mejia, 461 F.3d 522, 527 (5th Cir. 2006), which held that
“Booker does not give sentencing courts the discretion to impose
a non-Guideline sentence based on the courts’ disagreement with
Congressional and Sentencing Commission policy.” The
Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the
judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.