USA v. Arturo Organes-Gandavilla

Filing 920061017

Opinion

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED ________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS No. 06-11135 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D. C. Docket No. 05-20719-CR-DMM UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT OCTOBER 17, 2006 THOMAS K. KAHN CLERK

Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ARTURO ORGANES-GANDAVILLA, a.k.a. Arturo Organes Gandavilla, Defendant-Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida _________________________ (October 17, 2006) Before MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Arturo Organes-Gandavilla appeals his combined sentence of 228 months of

imprisonment for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine while on board a vessel, 46 U.S.C. App. § 1903(a), possession with intent to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine while on board a vessel, 46 U.S.C. App. § 1903(j), and possession of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). Organes-Gandavilla argues that his sentence is unreasonable because of an unwarranted sentencing disparity between his sentence and the sentences of his co-conspirators. We affirm. "We review the sentence imposed by the district court for reasonableness." United States v. Talley, 431 F.3d 784, 786 (11th Cir. 2005). "[W]hen the district court imposes a sentence within the advisory Guidelines range, we ordinarily will expect that choice to be a reasonable one." Id. Section 3553 of the sentencing guidelines includes as a sentencing factor "the need to avoid unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar conduct." 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). The district court considered this factor and found that the greater sentence imposed on Organes-Gandavilla was not unwarranted because Organes-Gandavilla was responsible for a firearm. The sentence imposed was not unreasonable.

2

The sentence is AFFIRMED.

3