Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01045/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01045-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jimmie Lee Gray
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the Western

District of Arkansas.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1045

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Western District of Arkansas.

Jimmie Lee Gray, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: January 26, 2006

Filed: February 1, 2006

___________

Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Jimmie Lee Gray appeals the sentence the district court1

 imposed after he

pleaded guilty to a drug charge. Mr. Gray argues under United States v. Booker,

125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), that the district court’s finding on the contested drug quantity

increased his sentence in violation of the Sixth Amendment.

Because the district court in sentencing Mr. Gray did not view the Guidelines

as mandatory, there was no Booker error. See Booker, 125 S. Ct. at 750-52, 756-57,

Appellate Case: 05-1045 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/01/2006 Entry ID: 2004316
-2-

764 (Sixth Amendment problem resulting from mandatory nature of Guidelines

remedied by making Guidelines advisory). To the extent Mr. Gray’s argument can be

construed as a challenge to the reasonableness of his sentence, see id. at 765-66

(appellate court reviews sentence for unreasonableness), we reject this challenge. The

record does not indicate that the district court failed to consider a relevant sentencing

factor, or considered an improper or irrelevant factor, or made a clear error of

judgment in weighing the factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See United States v.

Long Soldier, 431 F.3d 1120, ___(8th Cir. 2005); United States v. Haack, 403 F.3d

997, 1002-04 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 276 (2005). Given all the information

before the district court, including the arguments of Mr. Gray’s counsel at sentencing,

we conclude that the court considered appropriate sentencing factors and that the

sentence was not unreasonable. Accordingly, we affirm.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1045 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/01/2006 Entry ID: 2004316