FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT AUGUST 16, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 11166 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 2 6 - CR- T- 1 7 - TBM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A P O L I N A R A G U I R R E C A S T R O , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A u gu s t 16, 2006) B efo re B L A C K , C A RN E S an d B A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A po l i nar A gu i rr e C as tro appeal s hi s 87-m on th sent ence i m po se d aft er2

p le a d in g g u iltyto o n e c o u n t o f c o n s p ir a c yto p o s s e s s w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te c o c a in e w h ile o n b o a r d av e s s e l s u b je c t to th e ju r is d ic tio n o f th e U n ite dS ta te s , in vi ol a t i on of

46 A pp. U . S . C . § 1903( a ) , ( g) , a nd 21 U . S . C . § 960( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i i ) , a nd on e c ou ntof po ss es si on w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e c ocai ne w hi l e on b oard a ves se l s u b j e c tt o th e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f th e U n i t e dSt a t e s , a l s o i n v i o l a t i o n o f 4 6 A p p . U . S. C. § 1 90 3(a) , (g), and 2 1 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B )( i i ). C as tro appeal s hi s s ent ence as u n r e a s o n ab le , a r g u in g th a t, w h e n it w a s im p o s e dth e d is tr ic t c o u rt f a ile dto c o n s id e ra ll o f

th e f a c to r s e n u m e r a te din 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) . T he gove rnm e ntc ont e nds tha tthi s appe a l s houl d be r e vi e w e d f orpl a i n e rr or be c aus e of

C a s tr o’ s f

a i l ur e t o m a ke a nyobj e c t i ons t o the s e nt e nc e a thi s s e nt e nc i ng h e a r in g , w h ile C a s tr o c o n te n d s th a t th e s ta n d a r do f r e v ie w is r e a s o n ab le n e s s . W e ne e d notde c i de the i s s ue be c aus e hi s s e nt e nc e i s r e a s onabl e a nd due t o be a f f i rm e d u n d e re ith e rs ta n d a r d o f r e v ie w . A d is tr ic t c o u rt’s s e n te n c e im p o s e du n d e rth e a d v is o ryg u id e lin e r e g im e is r e vi e w abl e f

or“ unr e a s onabl e ne s s . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . 220, 261, 12 5 S . C t . 73 8, 76 5, 16 0 L . E d. 2d 62 1 (20 05 ). T he S up re m e C ou rti n B oo ker di re ct ed se nt enci ng court s t o con si der the fol l ow i ng fa ct ors i n i m po si ng se nt ence s u n d e rth e a d v is o ryg u id e lin e s s c h e m e : ( 1) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e a nd the hi s t orya nd char ac t er i st i cs of the defendant ; (2) the need for the se nt ence i m po se d3

( A ) t o r e f

l e c tthe s e r i ous ne s s of

the of f e ns e , t o pr om ot e r e s pe c tf orthe l aw , and t o p rovi de j ustpu ni shm entfor the offens e; (B ) t o aff ord a d e q u a te d e te rr e n c e to c r im in a l c o n d u c t; ( C ) to p r o te c t th e p u b lic f r om f urthe rc r i m e s of

the de f e nda nt ; a nd ( D ) t o pr ovi de the de f e nda nt w i th ne e de d [ tr e a tm e nt ] ; ( 3) the ki nds of s e nt e nc e s a va i l abl e ; ( 4) the k in d s o f s e n te n c e a n d th e s e n te n c in g r a n g e . . .; ( 6 ) th e n e e dto a v o id un w arrant ed se nt ence di spar i t i es am on g d ef endant s w i th si m i l ar r e c or ds w ho ha ve be e n f ound gui l tyof

s i m i l a rc onduc t ; a nd ( 7) the need t o p rovi de re st i tut i on t o any vi ct i m s of the offens e. 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) ; B ooke r , 543 U . S . a t261, 125 S . C t . a t765- 66. T he r e i s no re qu i re m ent , ho w ever , thatthe di stri ctcourtengage i n a det ai l ed, st ep-by- st ep a na l y s i s of

e ve ryf a c t or , a nd thi s C ourtha s he l d tha t“ nothi ng i n B ooke ror e ls e w h e r e r e q u ir e s th e d is tr ic t c o u rt to s ta te o n th e r e c o r dth a t it h a s e x p lic itly consi dere d eac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors or t o d i sc uss e ac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) f a c to r s .” U n ite d S ta te s v . S c o tt, 4 2 6 F .3 d1 3 2 4 , 1 3 2 9 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . B ec ause the di stri ctcourtconsi dere d C as tro’ s argum ent s andsugg es t ed m i t i ga t i ng f

a c t or s , r e duc e d hi s t ot a l of f e ns e l e ve l f

r om 33 t o 29, the r e bydoubl i ng the r e duc t i on m ove d f

orbythe gove rnm e ntpur s ua ntt o U . S . S . G . 5K 1. 1, a nd i m pos e d as e nt e nc e a tthe l ow e nd of the a dvi s orygui de l i ne r a nge , a nd gi ve n the c r i m e c o m m i tt e d , C a s tr o ’ s s e n t e n c e wa s n o tu n r e a s o n ab l yl o n g . Ac c o r d i n g l y , we a f f i rm. AF F I RME D.