Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circumstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 50418 Su m m ar yC al endar

UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t if f

- A pp el l ee

v. R O B E R T A LA N T H O M P S O N , D e fe nda nt
- Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or th e W est ernD i st ri ctof T exas U S D C N o . 7 :08 -C R -2 5 5 -2

B ef ore JO L LY , B A R K S D A L E , an d C L E M E N T , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IAM: * R ob ert A l a nT h om p son p le a d edgu i l ty to on e cou n t of con sp i ri n g to
m an u fact u re 50 gram s orm ore of m et h am ph et am i n e an d consp i ri n g t o possess p s e u d o e p h e d r in e w ith in te n t t o m a n u fa c tu r e m e th a m p h e ta m in e . S ee2 1 U. S
. C. §§ 8 4 1 a n d 8 4 6
. T h e dist ri ct cou rt sen ten ced T h om p s o n to , in tera lia , 184
m on t h s’i m pri sonm en t
. Th om pson ap pea l s hi s s en t en ce, cl ai m i n g: th e di st ri ct United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D December

21, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 09- 50418

2 c o ur t e r r e d i n c a l c ul a t i ng t he a m o un t o f m e t ha m p he t a m i ne f o r whi c h he w as responsibl e, an d s o erred i n cal cul ati n g h i s base- of fen se l evel ; an d, hi s s en t en ce i s g r e at er than ne c e s s ary t o a c c o m pli s h t he 1 8 U
. S. C. § 3 55 3( a) ( 2) s e nt e nc i ng obj ect ives. T h e G o v e r n m e n t c o n te n d s th a t T h o m p s o n w a iv e dh is r ig h t t o a p p e a l. B ecau se t h e m agis t rat e j u dg e di d not di scuss w i t h T h om pson th e w aiver pro vi si on o f

hi s pl ea agr ee m entatr ear r ai gn m en t, as w as r equir ed byFeder al R u l e of C ri m i n alP rocedure 11(b) ( 1) ( N ) , a n d becau se iti s un cl ear f rom t h e rec ord
w het h er T h o m ps o n r e ada nd u nde r s t o o d hi s pl e a agr e e m e nta nd h adno q u e s tio n s re g a r d in gth e w a iv e r p r o v is io n , th e w a iv e r w ill n o t b e e n fo r c e d
. S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. R obi n son , 1 8 7 F .3d5 1 6 , 5 1 7 -1 8 (5t h C ir. 1 9 9 9 ). A l th ou gh po st- B ooker , th e G u i d eli n es a re a d visoryo n ly, a n dan u l ti m a te
s e nt e nc e i s re vi e w e d f o rre as o nab l e ne s s unde ran a bus e - o f

- di s c r e t i o n s t and ar d, t h e di st ri ct court m u st st i l l properl y cal cul ate th e gu i del i n e- sentenci n g ran ge f or u s e in d e c id in go n th e s e n te n c e to im p o s e . G allv. Un i t ed S t ate s , 552 U
. S. 38, 51 ( 20 07 )
. I n t hatre s pe c t , i t s appli c at i o n of t he gui de l i ne s i s r e vi e w e d de no vo ; its fa c tu a l fin d in g s , o n lyfo rcle a re r r o r . E
. g. , Un i t ed S t ate s v. C i sneros- G u t i errez , 5 1 7 F .3 d7 5 1 , 7 6 4 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ); Uni t e d St at e sv . Vi l legas , 404 F. 3d 355, 359 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ). R egar di ng hi s c onten ti on t hatt he di st r i c tc our ter r ed i n ruli ng t hat T h om pson w as accoun t able f or 180
. 57 gram s of m et h am ph et am i n e, T h om pson ad m itt ed h e pu rchased 3 61. 14 gram s of th e precu rs o r c h e m ica l ps e u d o e p h e d rin e. H e m ai n t ai n s, how ever, t h at t h e di st ri ct court’ s app l i cat i on of a 50% conversi on r at i o wa s p r e m i s e do n a s s u m p t i o n s r a t h e rt h a n o n e v i d e n c e . T h e S e n t e n c i ng G u i d eli n es h a ve esta b l i sh eda 5 0 % con ve rsion r a tio f rom ps eu d oe p h ed ri n e to
m e th a m p h e ta m in e . S ee U .S .S .G
. § § 2 D 1 .1 (c ), 2 D 1 .1 1 (d); see als o Un i t ed S t ate s v . Ma rtin , 438 F
. 3d 621 , 625 , 633 ( 6th C i r. 200 6)
. A ccor di n gl y, t h e di st ri ctcourt
ne ithe rm i sa ppl i ed the G ui deli nes norc l ear ly e r r ed i n ruli ng t hatTh om pso n w as r e s p o n s ib le fo r1 8 0 .5 7 g r a m s o f m e th a m p h e ta m in e .N o. 09- 50418

3 R egard i n g h i s c on t en t i on t h at hi s 184-m on t h sentence i s u n re a son able, T h om pson di d n otobj ectt o t h e reasonab l en ess of hi s s en t en ce i n t h e di st ri ct
c o u r t. T h e r e fo r e , r e v ie w is o n lyfo rp la in e r r o r . S ee Un i t ed S t ate s v. Pel t i er , 505 F .3 d3 8 9 , 3 9 1 -9 2 ( 5 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ), cer t . den i ed , 128 S
. C t
. 295 9 ( 200 8)
. F or th ere t o be revers ibl e pl ai n err or, t h e di st ri ct c o u rt m u stha ve com m i t t ed a cl ear or obvi ous er r ort hataf fec t ed Thom pso n’ s subs t ant i alr i ght s; ev en t hen, w e have d is c r e tio n w h e th e rto co r r e c t s u c h e r r o ra n d , g e n e r a lly , w ill d o s o o n l yif it
se r i ous ly af

fec t s t he fai r nes s, i nt egr i t y, or publ i cr eput at i on o f j udi c i al p r o c e e d in g s . E
. g. , Un i t ed S t ate s v. B ak er , 5 3 8 F .3 d3 2 4 , 3 3 2 (5 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ), ce rt. d enie d , 1 2 9 S
. C t. 9 6 2 (20 0 9 ). The di s t r i c tc o ur ts t at e d thatitha d t ak e n i nt o a c c o untt he s e nt e nc i ng fac t o r s i n § 3 55 3( a) i n de t e r m i ni ng Thom ps o n’ s s e nt e nc e . “ [T] he s e nt en c i ng j u dg e i s i n a su peri or posit i on t o f i n d fact s andj u dg e t h ei r i m port u n der § 3 5 5 3 (a) w i thresp ect to a p a rti cu l a r d efen d a n t”. Uni t e d S t at e sv. Campo s - Maldo nado , 5 3 1 F .3 d3 3 7 , 3 3 9 (5 th C ir .), cer t . den i ed , 129 S. C t
. 328 (2 0 0 8 ). T h o m p s o n h a s n o t s h o w n th a t t h e d i s tr ic t c o u r t p la in lye r r e din de t e r m i ni ng t hata1 84

- m o nt h s e nt e nc e o f i m pr i s o nm e nt , w hi c h was w i t hi n t he
a d v iso ryg u id e li n e ra n g e , sa tisfiedth e se n te n cin gob jec tiv e s o f § 3 5 5 3 (a). AF F I RMED.