FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Se pt e m be r 6, 2007 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ 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- 14542 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 8 0 0 9 2 - C R - DT KH 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 F R A N K S T A L L I N G S , a .k .a . C a d illa c , 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 S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 6, 2007) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an dC A RN E S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

F rank S t al l i ng s app ea l s hi s s ent ence s i m po se d p ursuantt o h i s gui l ty pl ea s f o rc o n s p i r a c yt o p o s s e s s a n dp o s s e s s i o n o f c o c a i n e i n v i o l a t i o n o f

2 1 U . S. C. § § 8 4 6 a n d8 4 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) a s b e i n g u n r e a s o n ab l e . S t a l l i n g s a r g u e s th a th i s b e l o wG ui de l i ne s s e nt e nc e w a s unr e a s onabl e be c aus e he r e c e i ve d a“ pa t e nt l ye xc e s s i ve and u nfai r” care eroffe nd erenhancem entpu rs uantt o U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 1(a) , w hi ch w a s b a s e do n “s ta le a n dr e m o te ” p r e d ic a te o f f e n s e s a n dp r o d u c e da n u n r e a s o n ab le s e n te n c in g d is p a r ityb e tw e e n S ta llin g s a n dh is m o r e c u lp ab le c o d e f e n d a n ts . W e ap p lyth e d e f

e r e n tia l s ta n d a r do f

r e a s o n ab le n e s s to th e f in a l s e n te n c e , in lig h t o f th e f a c to r s s e t f

o rth in 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) . U n ite d S ta tes v . M

a r tin , 455 F .3 d1 2 2 7 , 1 2 3 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . H o w e v e r , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt n e e dn o t e x p lic itly st at e on the re cord thati thas c on si dere d eac h fac t or and n ee d n otdi sc uss e ac h f a c to r . I d. A n a c know l e dgm e ntbythe di s tr i c tc ourttha ti tha s c ons i de r e d the d e f e n d a n t’s a r g u m e n ts a n dth e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s w ill s u f

f ic e . I d. ; se e al so R i ta v. U ni ted States , 127 S . C t . 2456, 2468 ( 2007) ( not i ng tha tthe “ s e nt e nc i ng j udge s houl d s e tf

orth e nough t o s a t i s f

ythe appe l l a t e c ourttha the ha s c ons i de r e d the pa rt i e s ’ a r gum e nt s a nd ha s ar e a s one d ba s i s f ore xe r c i s i ng hi s ow n l e ga l de c i s i on m aki ng autho ri ty” ). In det erm i ni ng i f the di stri ctcourthas a dequ at el y c on si dere d th e d ef en d an t’ s a rg u m en ts an dth e § 3 5 5 3 (a ) f ac to rs , w e lo o kto th e d istrict co u rt’s s ta te m e n ts o v e rth e e n tir e s e n te n c in g h e a r in g . Se e Un i te d S ta te s v . Wi l l i a ms , 4353

F .3 d1 3 5 0 , 1 3 5 5 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) . T h e b u r d e n o f p r o v in g th a t th e s e n te n c e is u n r e a s o n ab le in lig h t o f th e r e c o r da n dth e s e f

a c to r s r e s ts o n th e c h a lle n g e r . U ni ted States v. T

al ley , 4 3 1 F .3 d7 8 4 , 7 8 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . I n thi s c a s e , the di s tr i c tc ourtc ons i de r e d S t a l l i ngs ’ a r gum e nt s a ts e nt e nc i ng, st at ed thati thad con si dere d eac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors, and i m po se d sent ence s b el o w b o th th e st atu t o ry m ax i m u m an dth e ad v i so ry G u i d el i n es ran g e. S t al l i n g s’ sugg es t i on thatthe se nt enci ng di spar i ty betw ee n h i m and h i s c o-defendant s r enders th e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s sen t en ce u n reaso n ab l e i s i n su ffi ci en tt o sh o w u n reaso n ab l en ess be c aus e S t a l l i ngs ha d adi f f e r e ntc r i m i na l hi s t orytha n hi s c o- de f e nda nt s . T he di f f e r e nc e s be tw e e n hi s a nd hi s c o- de f e nda nt s ’ c r i m i na l hi s t or i e s a c c ount e d f or the i rdi f f e r e nts e nt e nc e s a s c ont e m pl a t e d byboth the purpos e s of s e nt e nc i ng em b o d i ed i n th e § 3 5 5 3 (a) factors an dth e G u i d el i n es cal cu l at i o n i t sel f. T h u s, S t al l i ng s has fa i l ed t o m ee thi s burden o f e st abl i shi ng thathi s s ent ence s are u n reaso n ab l e. A cco rd i n g l y, w e affi rm b o th o f S t al l i n g s’ sen t en ces. AF F I RME D.