Case: 12-13267 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-13267
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:11-cr-00364-WS-C-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RODERICK BERNARD MYLES,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Alabama
________________________
(February 5, 2013)
Before BARKETT, MARCUS and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Roderick Myles appeals his 180-month sentence, after pleading guilty to
one count of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a). On appeal, Myles
Case: 12-13267 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 2 of 3
argues that his sentence was substantively unreasonable. He argues that all of his
prior robberies were related and if they had all been prosecuted in the same county
then the applicable guideline range would have been lower. He argues that his
criminal history points account for his prior robberies, and that a 180-month
sentence is not necessary for deterrence, protection of the public, or punishment.
We review the reasonableness of a sentence under a deferential abuse-of-
discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). In determining
substantive reasonableness, we examine the totality of the circumstances, including
an evaluation of whether the statutory factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) support the
sentence. United States v. Gonzales, 550 F.3d 1319, 1324 (11th Cir. 2008). The
district court shall impose a sentence “sufficient, but not greater than necessary to
comply with the purposes” of § 3553(a)(2), which include the need to reflect the
seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, to provide just
punishment for the offense, to afford deterrence of criminal conduct, and to protect
the public from the defendant’s future criminal conduct. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2).
The court shall also consider the nature and circumstances of the offense and the
history and characteristics of the defendant, as well as the kinds of sentence and the
sentencing range established. 18 U.S.C. §§ 3553(a)(1), (a)(4). We will find the
sentence substantively unreasonable only if left with the firm conviction that the
2
Case: 12-13267 Date Filed: 02/05/2013 Page: 3 of 3
district court committed a clear error of judgment in weighing the § 3553(a)
factors. United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160, 1190 (11th Cir. 2010) (en banc).
The 180-month sentence is substantively reasonable in light of the
circumstances and the § 3553(a) factors. The application of, and consideration of,
the sentence under the career offender Guidelines was not improper under U.S.S.G.
§ 4A1.2(a)(2), which provides that prior sentences that are not separated by an
intervening arrest are counted separately unless the sentences result from offenses
in the same charging instrument or the sentences were imposed on the same day.
Furthermore, the district court properly gave weight to the seriousness of the
offense and Myles’s criminal history. 18 U.S.C. § 3553. Therefore, the district
court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a 180-month sentence.
AFFIRMED.
3