USA v. Adkins
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 17, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-51344 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus SAMMY JOE ADKINS, Defendant-Appellant. -------------------Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 5:06-CR-036-2 -------------------Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Sammy Joe Adkins pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting distribution of more than 50 grams of methamphetamine and was sentenced to 100 months in prison to be followed by five years of supervised release. Adkins appeals, asserting that his sentence
is unreasonable because the district court did not accord proper weight to the sentencing factors given in 18 U.S.C. § 3553; and thus, effectively reinstated the mandatory Guidelines regime condemned in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Adkins also contends that the court should have taken into 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 06-51344 -2account his age, his wife's health, his good work history, and the disparity between his sentence and that of his co-defendant, who received 36 months. A presumption of reasonableness applies to a district court within-guidelines sentence that reflects a proper application of the Guidelines. See Rita v. United States, ___ S. Ct. ___, 2007
WL 1772146 at *6-8 (June 21, 2007); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). The record shows that the
district court fulfilled its duty to consider the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553 factors in addition to the Guidelines, and sentenced Adkins to 100 months of imprisonment, the lowest end of the sentencing guidelines range. F.3d 511, 518-19 (5th Cir. 2005). See United States v. Mares, 402 There is no indication that Id. at 519.
the sentence imposed is unreasonable.
Under the Guidelines, employment record; family ties and responsibilities; age, unless the defendant is elderly and infirm; and health, unless the defendant is seriously infirm, are not proper considerations when deciding whether to depart. U.S.S.G. §§ 5H1.1-5H1.6. The record is silent regarding the reasons for Adkins's codefendant's sentence and whether the defendants are similarly situated with respect to criminal history and circumstances. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6). AFFIRMED. The judgment of the district court is See See
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?