Case ID: f-appx_204/html/0482-01.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. Carl V. FAVORITE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-31151
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 8, 2006.
    Chad P. Ennis, Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Christopher Albert Aberle, Mandeville, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Carl V. Favorite appeals his guilty-plea conviction and sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He contends that the sentence imposed was unreasonable because it failed to reflect the unusual lack of seriousness of the offense.

Favorite does not challenge the district court’s calculation of the guideline range. The district court considered the Sentencing Guidelines, along with the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and determined that a sentence at the top of the guideline range was appropriate. Therefore, Favorite’s sentence within the properly calculated guideline range was presumptively reasonable, and he has failed to demonstrate that his sentence was unreasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554-55 (5th Cir. 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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.