USA v. Castillo

Filing 920080627

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 07-11045 Summary Calendar
June 27, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ENCARNACION CASTILLO, JR, Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 2:94-CR-56-ALL

Before GARZA, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Encarnacion Castillo, Jr., appeals the 24-month sentence imposed by the district court following the revocation of his supervised release. He argues that the district court failed to properly weigh the factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) when imposing the statutory maximum sentence, thereby rendering his sentence unreasonable.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 07-11045 Because Castillo did not object to his sentence in the district court, review is limited to plain error. See United States v. Lopez-Velasquez, ___ F.3d ___, Nos. 07-10151, 07-10321, 2008 WL 1874577 at *1 (5th Cir. Apr. 29, 2008). The district court considered the policy statements of Chapter 7 and determined that the facts of the instant case warranted a sentence above the recommended range. Castillo's probation officer testified for sentencing purposes, revealing that Castillo tested positive for cocaine on one occasion and did not submit a urine specimen on another occasion. Castillo has not shown that his revocation sentence is unreasonable or plainly unreasonable. United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 120 (5th Cir. 2005). Therefore, the district court did not plainly err in imposing Castillo's sentence. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

2