### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 30668 Su m m ar y Cal 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. CI NDYMARI E L ONDO D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

con soli d a tedw i th N o. 08- 30669 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. M ON I CA RE N E BRU M FI ELD D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp eal s f

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 SD C N o. 6: 07- C R - 60015- 1 United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D May 5, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o . 0 8 -3 0 6 6 8 c/w N o. 08- 30669

Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not * be publishe d and is not precedent exceptunder the limited circu mstance s set forthin5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 2 B ef ore H IG G IN B O T H A M , B A R K S D A L E , an d E L R O D , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * C i n dyM ari e L on do an d M on i ca R en e B rum f i el d, w h ose c ases hav e been con soli d a tedon a p p ea l , w ere i n vo lve d i n a sch em e to d efrau dthe S ocial Se cu ri ty A d m in is tr a tio n . L o n d o p le a d e dg u iltyto o n e c o u n t o f c o n s p ir a c yto co m m it soci al - securi t y f

rau d, i n vi ol ati on of

18 U . S . C . § 371; B rum f i el d, t o one coun tof m a k i n g a fal se statem en t to a go ve rn m en t a ge n cy , i n violati on of 1 8 U . S . C . § 1 0 0 1 .The ad vi s o r y gui de l i ne r ang e o f i m pr i s o nm e ntforb o t h Lo ndo a nd B rum f i el d w as 15 to 21 m on t h s. Lon do contend ed at sentenci n g t h at her c r i m i nal - hi st ory sc o r e o ve r - r e pr e s e nt e d he rpa s tc r i m e s ; Br um f i e l d, t hatt he c o ur ts ho ul d c o ns i de rt he dif f i c ul tc i r c um s t anc e s o f he rl ife w he n de t e r m i ni ng h er sentence. T h e di st ri ct court i m posed sentences ou t si de th e a d vi sory g u id e lin e ra n g e , re q u ir in gL o n d o a n dB r u m fie lde a c h to s e rv e 6 0 m o n th s in pr i s o n. L o n d o a n dB r u m fie ldco n t e n dth e irs e n te n c e s a r e s u b s ta n tiv e ly unr e as o nab l e b e c aus e t he i rr e s pe ct ivec r i m i nalhi s t o r i e s w e r e a de qua t e l y and a c c u r a te lyre p r e s e n te dinth e p r e s en ten c e re p o r t. B e c a u s e L o n d o a n dB r u m fie ld p rese n t dif

feren t con ten ti on s on ap p ea ltha n the y p rese n tedi n distri ct cou rt, r e v ie w is o n lyfo rp la in e r r o r . E . g. , Un i t ed S t ate s v. G ree n , 324 F . 3 d 3 7 5, 381 ( 5t h C i r . 2003) (obs ervi ng t hat , w her e a cont ent i on on appealdif fer s f r om t hat r a is e dind is tr ic t c o u r t, o u rre v ie w is fo rp la in e r r o r). I n s e l e c t i ng t he s e nt e nc e s , t he di s t r i c tc o ur ta ppr o pr i at e l y c o ns i de r e d the a d v i s o r y s e n t e n c i n g g u i d e l i n e s a n dt h e s e n t e n c i n gfa c t o r s s e tf o r t h a t1 8 U. S . C. § 3 5 5 3 (a ). Un i t ed S t ate s v. B ooker , 5 4 3 U .S . 2 2 0 (2 0 0 5 ); Un i t ed S t ate s v. G a ll ,N o . 0 8 -3 0 6 6 8 c/w N o. 08- 30669

3 128 S. C t. 5 86, 596 - 97 (2007). Th e courtf ou n d the 60-m on t h sentences app rop r i at e i n t he li ghtof Londo’ s and B r um f i el d’ s per so naland c r i m i nal h i s t o r i e s , t h e i rl i k e lih o o do f r e c i d iv i s m, t h e n e e dt o p r o mo t e r e s p e c tfo rt h e l a w, th e n ee dto pro vid e ade te r r e n t to fu tu re crim i n a lbe h a vior, an dthe n ee dto p r o te c t t h e p u b lic . S ee , e . g. , Un itedS ta tes v. S m ith , 41 7 F . 3 d48 3 , 49 1 -93 ( 5 th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ) (pos t- B ooker , a f f i r m i ng a de pa r t ur e f r o m ar ang e o f

3 3 t o 4 1 m o nt hs t o as t at ut or y m axi m um of 120 m ont hs o n t he bas i s t hat Sm i t h w as “ a habi t ual c r im in a l w h o h a s n o t b e e n d e te r r e db yp r o b a tio n o rp a r o le , su p e rv is io n , b r ie f ja il te r m s , o rp r is o n s e n te n c e s ”). F in a lly , th e 1 8 6 % u p w a r dd e v ia tio n inis s u e h e r e , a lth o u g h s u b s ta n tia l, i s l e s s t han, o ra ppr o xi m at e l y e qua lt o , o t he rg ui de l i ne de pa r t ur e s a nd d e v ia ti on s affirm edi n this circu i t po st- B ookeran dpo st- G a ll . S ee , e . g. , Un i t ed S ta tes v. Mejia -Hu er ta , 480 F . 3d713 , 716 - 19 , 723 - 24 ( 5th C i r . 200 7) ( af f i r m i ng upwar d d e vi at i o ns o f 1 40 % , 1 34 % , 3 44 % , a nd 12 2% f r o m t he a dv i s o r y gui de l i ne r a n g e s ), cer t . den i ed , 1 2 8 S . C t. 2 9 5 4 (20 0 8 ). A ccor di n gl y, nei t h er th e di st ri ct co u rt ’ s vari an ce f rom t h e adv i sory g u id e lin e s ra n g e n o rth e e x te n t o f th e v a r ia n c e co n s tit u te s p la in e r r o r . S eeG a ll , 1 2 8 S . C t. a t 5 9 6 -9 7 . AF F I RMED.