FI LED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS ELEV ENT H CI RCUI T J ANUARY 28, 20 09 T HOMAS K . KAHN CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 0 8- 10 46 1 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 7- 20 67 3- CR-J LK UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us W ILLIAM FREDERIC K HILL, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

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

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e So uthe rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (J anua ry 28 , 20 09 ) Befo re EDMONDSON, Ch ie f Ju dg e, BIRC H andDUBINA, Circ ui t J ud ge s. PER CURI AM: W il li am Fred eri ckHil l ap pe al s h is 18 8- m on th sen te nc e fo r po ss es si on with in te ntto di st rib ut e fi ve gra m s o r m or e o f co cai ne ba se , invi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C. §84 1( a)(1 ). Hil l ar gu es th athi s s en te nc e is pro cedur al ly unr eas on ab le be cau se th e

di st ric t co urt fa il edto co ns id er the fact or s en um erat edin18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a) whe n i t i m

po se d h is sen te nc e. W e d is ag ree a ndaffi rm hi s s en te nc e. I. InAug us t 2 00 7, Hi ll was c ha rg edwith fo urco cai ne -rel at edoff en se s. He pl ead edgu il ty to o ne off

en se : p os se ss io n wi thin te ntto di st rib ut e fi ve gra m s o r m or e o f co cai ne ba se . In ex ch an ge , th e g ov ern m en t ag reedto di sm is s t he rem ai ni ng th ree o ffen se s atsen te nc in g a ndto reco m m en d t ha t Hi ll rece iv e a reduc ti on inhi s ad vi so ry gu id el in e o ffen se lev el forhi s ac cep ta nc e o f res po ns ib il it y . The d is tri ctco urt ac cep te d Hi ll ’s gu il ty ple a, or de reda pr ese nt en ce i nv es ti ga ti on rep ort, an d s ch edul edth e m at te r fo r se nt en ci ng . At s en te nc in g, Hi ll ackno wled ge d t ha t h e h adno ob jecti on to th e p rese nt en ce i nv es ti ga ti on rep ort o r it s ca lc ul at io n o f th e advi so ry gu id el in e ran ge . The parti es joi nt ly recomm en de d t ha t the di st ric t co urt s en te nc e Hil l t o 1 88 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t, the lo w endof t he advi so ry gu id el in e ran ge . The d is tri ct co urt ad op te d t ha t re co m m en da ti on . Hill di d n otob ject t o t he sen te nc e o r th e 2m an ne r in whi chitwas i m po se d. Th e d is tri ctco urt ad vi se d Hi ll th athe ha d t he rig htto ap pe al hi s s en te nc e, whi ch he do es no w. II. W e n orm al ly revi ew th e p ro cedur al reas on ab le ne ss of asen te nc e fo r an ab us e o f di sc ret io n. Gal l v . Uni te d S ta te s, 1 28 S. Ct. 5 86 , 59 6- 97 (20 07 ). Bu t be cau se Hil l fa il edto rai se hi s cl ai m of p ro cedur al un reas on ab le ne ss inth e d is tri ct co urt, we re vi ew itforpl ai n e rro r on ly. See, e.g ., Uni te d S ta te s v . Pel ti er, 5 05 F.3 d 3 89 , 39 1- 92 (5t h C ir. 2 00 7) ; Un it edSta te s v . Burne tt e, 51 8 F .3d94 2, 9 46 (8 th Cir . 20 08 ); Un it edSta te s v . Kno ws Hi s Gu n, 4 38 F.3d91 3, 9 18 (9t h C ir. 20 06 ); Un it edSta te s v . Lop ez-F lo res , 44 4 F .3d12 18 , 12 21 (10 th Cir . 20 06 ). Und er p la in erro r rev ie w, Hill m us t es tabl is h t ha t the di st ric t co urt co m m it te d a n e rro r, th atth e err orwas p la in , andth atth e err oraffe ct edhi s subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts . Uni te d S ta te s v . Rod rig ue z, 39 8 F .3d12 91 , 12 98 (11 thCir . 20 05 ). If Hil l es tabl is he s t ho se fact s, we m ay ex erci se our di sc ret io n t o n ot ic e th e fo rfei te d e rro r, bu t o nl y

if i t “ se rio us ly affect s t he fai rn es s, i nt eg rit y , or p ub li c rep ut at io n o f jud ic ia l p ro ceed in gs .” Id . (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d) . 3Eve n i f we as su m e th atth e d is tri ctco urt co m m it te d p la in erro r by ne gl ect in g t o c on si de r th e se ct io n 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s atHil l’s s en te nc in g, Hi ll can no t sh ow t ha t the erro r affe ct edhi s s ub st an ti al rig ht s. Fo r anerro r to do so , it ge ne ral ly “m

us t h av e b een pre

jud ic ia l: It m

us t h av e aff

ect edth e o ut co m e o f th e di st ric t co urt p ro ceed in gs .” Uni te d S ta te s v . Olan o, 1 13 S. Ct. 1 77 0, 1 77 8 (1 99 3) ; se e al so Ro dr ig ue z, 39 8 F .3dat 1 29 9. Hi ll ha s n ei th er al le ge d n orsh own th atth e di st ric t co urt wo ul d h av e im po se d alo wer s en te nc e h aditex pl ic it ly con si de redth e se ct io n 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, wh ic h i s n otsu rp ris in g g iv enth atbo thpa rti es reco m m en de d, an d t he di st ric t co urt ad op te d, a s en te nc e atth e ex tre m e lo w endof th e ad vi so ry

gu id el in e ran ge . Becau se Hil l ca nn otsh ow t ha t the erro r affe ct edhi s subs ta nt ia l ri gh ts , hi s ap pe al m us t fa il . III. Hil l’s s en te nc e is affi rm ed . AFFIR MED.

4