### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 10988 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ALFREDO MAYORAL , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:14

- CR

- 46

- 1

Before BARKSDALE, CLEMENT, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Alfredo Mayoral challe nges the supervised

- release condition of his sentence imposed following his guilty

- plea conviction for passing and uttering counterfeit currency, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 472 and 2

. He contends the condition’s requiring him to provide his probation of ficer any requested financial information was inadequately justified by the court ; is plainly unreasonable; and violates his constitutional

- liberty interests

.

* Pursuant to 5 th Cir. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 th Cir. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 9, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-10988 Document: 00513541713 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/09/2016No. 14

- 10988
Mayoral may have waived a challenge to the supervised

- release condition by signing the form acknowledging the condition at issue and agreeing to be bound it ; “[ n ] evertheless, out of an abundance of caution, w e will review for plain error ”

. United States v. Fernandez

- Cusco , 447 F.3d 382, 384 (5th Cir. 2006). Under that stand ard, Mayoral must show a forfeited plain (clear or obvious) erro r that affected his substantial rights. Puckett v. United States , 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009). If he does so, we have the discretion to correct the reversible plain error, but should do so only if it “seriously affect[s] the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings”. Id

. Generally, the court has broad discretion to impose special conditions of supervised release. United States v. Fernandez , 776 F.3d 344, 346 (5th Cir. 2015). That discretion is limited by 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (1) , which requires the conditions to be “reasonably related” to the relevant factors provided in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) : t he nature and circumstances of the offense and defendant’s history and charact eristics; affording adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; protecting the public from further crimes by defendant; and providing defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment. See United States v. Caravayo , 809 F.3d 269, 275 (5th Cir. 2015)

. The special condition must impose “no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary” to serve the last three of the above § 3553(a) factors , and it must be consistent with any rel evant policy statements in the Sentencing Guidelines. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d) (2)

– (3)

. At sentencing, contrary to Mayoral’s assertion, t he court explained that his sentence satisfied the need to protect the public, impose a fair punishment for the offense, an d deter Mayoral from future offenses of this type

. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d)

. It refer red to th e nature of the offense and his relevant criminal history, which included other offen ses of a financial

- fraud nature

.

2 Case: 14-10988 Document: 00513541713 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/09/2016No. 14

- 10988

These references support that the court co nsider ed the relevant § 3553(a) factors in imposing the sentence , and determined the financial

- information condition appropriate

. See United States v. Sealed Juvenile , 781 F.3d 747, 752 (5th Cir. 2015 )

. Additionally, t he Guidelines recommend a supervised

- release condition requiring the defendant to provide access to any requested financial information if the court “ imposes a n order of . . . forfeiture ” , as it did here

. U.S.S.G. § 5D1.3(d)(3) (p.s.). Therefore, for plain

- error purposes, Mayora l fails : t o show the sentence was greater than necessary to achieve the goals of sentencing , protect the public , and deter such crimes in the future , s ee 18 U.S.C. § 3583(d); Caravayo , 809 F.3d at 275 ; and , failing to show clear or obvious error regarding the condition ’s meeting the tailoring requirements of § 3583(d), also fails to show such error concerning the condit ion ’s not violating his c onstitutional

- liberty interests , s ee Caravayo , 809 F.3d at 274

. AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 14-10988 Document: 00513541713 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/09/2016