Case ID: f-appx_293/html/0083-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Sarah KABEL, also known as Sarah Schabert, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 07-4152-cr.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Sept. 19, 2008.
    Timothy W. Hoover, Federal Public Defenders, Buffalo, NY, for Appellant.
    James P. Kennedy Jr., Assistant United States Attorney for Terrance P. Flynn, United States Attorney for the Western District of New York, for Appellee.
    PRESENT: Hon. JOSÉ A. CABRANES, Hon. B.D. PARKER, Hon. RICHARD C. WESLEY, Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Defendant-Appellant Sarah Kabel appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Arcara, J.). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the ease, and the issues on appeal.

Appellant argues that the district court’s imposition of a within-Guidelines sentence of eighteen months was both procedurally and substantively unreasonable. We disagree. The District Court correctly noted during the sentencing that, under U.S. v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) and United States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir.2005), it must consider the Guidelines, but is not bound by them. The District Court also recognized that he was obligated to consider the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Appellant failed to document that her sentence proceeding was in any way procedurally flawed, nor has she demonstrated that her sentence is substantively unreasonable. See United States v. Fernandez, 443 F.3d 19, 30 (2d Cir.2006) (“[W]e presume, in the absence of record evidence suggesting otherwise, that a sentencing judge has faithfully discharged her duty to consider the statutory factors.”).

For the foregoing reason, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.