FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T OCT 28, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 83 8 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 4 :0 9- cr-1 00 30 -KMM -1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, vers us TOMAS MORALES, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defend an t-Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Oct ob er 2 8, 2 01 0) Befo re TJ OFLAT, BARKETT an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: Tom as Mo ral es pl edgu il ty to co ns pi racy to e nc ou rag e an d i nduc e an ali en to co m e to , ent er, an d re si de in th e Uni te d S ta te s, i n v io la ti on of 8 U.S.C.§ 1 32 4( a)(1 )(A)(v )(I), a ndth e d is tri ctco urt s en te nc edhi m to pri so n fo r 60 m on th s. He ap pe al s h is sen te nc e, co nt en di ng th atitis bo th pro cedur al ly andsubs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le . It i s p ro cedur al ly unr eas on ab le , he s ay s, b ecau se hi s cr im in al hi st ory was fu ll y tak enin to acco un t b y

th e Gui de li ne s s en te nc in g ra ng e, an d t he
co urt i m pr op erl y rel ie d o n t he hi st ory

in im po si ng a se nt en ce ab ov e su ch ran ge . ( Id
. ). It i s s ub st an ti ve ly unr eas on ab le gi ve n h is in di vi du al cir cu m st an ces . 1 W e rev ie w th e rea so nabl en es s o f a d is tri ctco urt’s s en te nc e u nd er a de fere nt ia l ab us e o f di sc ret io n s ta nd ard
. Gal l v. Un it ed St at es , 55 2 U.S. 3 8, 4 1, 12 8 S .Ct. 5 86 , 59 1, 1 69 L.Ed.2d44 5 (2 00 7) . In re vi ewin g t he reas on ab le ne ss of a
se nt en ce, we co nduc t a t wo- st ep rev ie w, firs t en su rin g t ha t t he sen te nc e was pr oc edur al ly reaso nabl e, m ean in g t he di stric t co urt p ro pe rly calc ul at edth e Gui de li ne s s en te nc in g ra ng e, tr eat edth e Gui de li ne s as advi so ry , con si de redth e 1 8 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, d idno t s el ecta se nt en ce b as edon cle arl y erro ne ou s fact s, an d a de qu at el y

ex pl ai ne d t he ch os ensen te nc e. Gal l , 55 2 U.S. at51 , 12 8 S.Ct . at 5 97
.

Morales a lso contends that if his sentenc e wa s imposed as a de parture from the 1 sentenc ing r ang e, it constituted a depa rture a nd was done without advancenotice. Since the district court foc used entire ly on the fa ctors conta ined in 28 U.S.C. § 3553(a) in imposing sentenc e, its deviation from the se ntencingrang e wa s a variance rathe r than a depar ture. See United States v. Eldick

, 443 F.3d 783, 788 n.2 ( 11th Cir. 2006). 2Inim

po si ng a se nt en ce, t he co urt m us t s ta te it s re as on s fo r ch oo si ng it . 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( c). Howe ve r, th e co urt i s n otrequi redto “ st at e o n t he reco rdth atit ha s ex pl ic it ly con si de redeach of t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s o r to di sc us s ea ch of t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s.” Uni te d Sta te s v. Ta ll ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 86 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). Rat he r, th e co urt’s ac kn owl ed gm en t tha t i t h as co ns id eredth e § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s to ge th er wi th th e p art ie s’ arg um en ts is su ffi ci en t. Se e id
. Onc e we d et erm in e th ata se nt en ce i s p ro cedur al ly sou nd , we exa m in e whe th er t he sen te nc e is subs tant iv el y reas on ab le in li gh t o f th e rec or d a ndth e § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Gal l , 55 2 U.S. at51 , 56 , 12 8 S .Ct. at59 7, 6 00 . The co urt i s requi redto im

po se a se nt en ce t ha t i s “ su ffi ci en t, b utno t g reat er t han n eces sa ry to
co m pl y wit h t he pu rp os es ” li st edin 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 ), in cl ud in g t he ne edto refl ectth e se rio us ne ss of the off en se , pro m ot e res pe ctforth e la w, pro vi de jus t pu ni sh m en t fo r th e o ffen se , det er cr im in al co nduc t, p ro te ctth e p ub li c fro m th e de fen da nt ’s futur e cri m in al co nduc t, an d p ro vi de th e d efen da ntwit h n eed ed educ at io na l o r vo cat io na l t rai ni ng or m ed ic al care . Se e 18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a)(2 ). The co urt m

us t al so co ns id er t he na tu re an d c irc um st an ces of t he off en se , th e hi st ory an d c ha ract eri st ic s o f th e d efen da nt , th e k in ds of s en te nc es av ai labl e, th e ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge , th e p ert in en t p ol ic y st at em en ts of t he Sen te nc in g

3Co m

m is si on , th e n eedto av oi d u nwa rran te d s en te nc in g d is pa rit ie s, an d the ne edto pr ov id e res ti tu ti on to vi ct im s. Id
. § 3 55 3( a)(1 ), (3 )-(7 ). Inde te rm in in g wh ethe r a s en te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y reas on ab le , th e d is tri ct
co urt m ay co ns id er fa ct s tha t h av e al read y be entak enin to acco un t i n c al cu la ti ng th e se nt en ci ng ran ge . Se e Uni te d Sta te s v. Will ia ms , 52 6 F .3d13 12 , 13 23 -2 4 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 8) (di st ric t co urt co ul d c on si de r de fen da nt ’s pri oroff en se s i n de ci di ng to im

po se anup wardva ria nc e, ev enth ou gh th os e o ffen se s wer e al read y in cl ud edin th e d efen dant ’s cri m in al hi st ory sco re); see al

so 18 U.S.C. § 3 66 1 (“No l im it at io n s ha ll be pl acedon th e in fo rm at io n c on cern in g the ba ck gr ou nd , ch arac te r, an d c on du ctof ape rs on co nv ic te d o f an off en se whi ch a co urt o f th e Uni te d S ta te s m ay

rece iv e an d c on si de r fo r th e p ur po se of i m

po si ng anap pr op ria te
se nt en ce”) . W e h av e p rev io us ly affirm edup wardva ria nc es th atwere b as edin part
on th e d efen da nt ’s pri orcri m in al hi st ory . Se e, e.g . , Uni te d Sta te s v. S ha w , 56 0 F.3 d 1 23 0, 1 23 9- 41 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ) (aff irming 83 -m on th up wardva ria nc e in a cas e whe re t he de fen da ntha d 2 6 p rio r arre st s)
. Inli gh t o f th es e p rin ci pl es , we con cl ud e th atMo ral es ’s 60 -m on th s’ sen te nc e is reas on ab le bo th pro cedur al ly andsubs ta nt iv el y . The d is tri ctco urt co rrec tl y cal cu la te d t he sen te nc in g ra ng e, an d t he n e xe rci se d i ts au th or it y to de vi at e fro m

4th atran ge ba se d o n t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Th e co urt p ro pe rly con si de redth e

§ 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s an d t he weig htth atsh ou ldbe gi ve n t he m . AFFIR MED
.

5