Case ID: f-appx_694/html/0972-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Christopher Terrell BRADLEY, Defendant-Appellant
    No. 17-60047 Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Filed August 10, 2017
    Susan Spears Bradley, Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    George Lowrey Lucas, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Northern District of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before BENAVIDES, SOUTHWICK, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Christopher Terrell Bradley appeals the 60-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for failure to register as a sex offender. The district court varied above the guidelines range of 30 to 37 months of imprisonment, citing the volume .and sometimes violent nature of Bradley’s criminal history, ’the need to afford adequate deterrence to continued criminal conduct, and the need to protect the public from further crimes. These were proper factors for the district court to consider. See United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 708 (5th Cir. 2006). Given the significant deference that is due to a district, court’s consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007), and the district court’s reasons for its sentencing decision, Bradley has not demonstrated that his sentence is substantively unreasonable or an abuse of discretion, see United States v. McElwee, 646 F.3d 328, 344-45 (5th Cir. 2011).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.