Case ID: f-appx_235/html/0229-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      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. Martin Michael FLORES, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-51424
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    July 24, 2007.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Lucien B. Campbell, Federal Public Defender, Henry Joseph Bemporad, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Martin Michael Flores has appealed the sentence imposed following revocation of his term of supervised release. Flores argues that his 24-month sentence is unreasonable because it is above the advisory guideline range and the sentencing factors cited by the district court are taken into account by the Sentencing Guidelines.

The district court properly considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors when imposing Flores’s sentence. See United States v. Gonzalez, 250 F.3d 923, 930 (5th Cir.2001). The sentence is neither unreasonable nor plainly unreasonable. See United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 120 (5th Cir.2005), cert. denied, 547 U.S. 1083, 126 S.Ct. 1804, 164 L.Ed.2d 540 (2006).

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.