The Honor able L ouis L . Stanton of the United States District Court for the Souther n * District of Ne w York, sitting by desig nation. 09-1499-c r USA v. Buke r (L auber) U N IT E D S T A T E S C O U R T O F A P P E A LS F O R T H E S E C O N D C IR C U IT SUM M AR

Y O RD ER RULINGS BY SUMM ARY O RDER DO NOT H AVE PRECEDENTIAL EF F ECT. CITATION TO SUMM ARY O RDERS FI LED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007 , IS P ERMI TTED AND IS GOVERNED B Y THIS COURT’S LO CAL RULE 32.1 AND F EDERAL RULE OF APP ELLATE PRO CEDURE 32.1 . IN A B RIEF OR OTH ER P AP ER IN WH ICH A LITIGANT CITES A SUMM ARY O RDER, IN EA CH PARA GR

APH IN WHICH A CIT AT ION A PP EA RS , A T LE AS T ONE CIT AT ION MU ST EITH ER BE TO THE F EDERAL APP ENDIX OR B E ACCOM P ANIED B Y T HE NO TATIO N: “( S U MMA R

Y ORD E R). ” A PA R T Y C IT IN G A S U MMA R Y ORD E R

MU S T S E R

V E AC OPY OF THAT SUM MARY ORDER TOGETH ER W I T H T H E PAP ER IN WHI CH TH E SUMM ARY ORD E R I S C IT E D ON A N Y PA R T Y N OT RE PR E S E N T ED BY C OU N S E L U N L E S S T HE SUMM ARY O RDER IS AVAILABLE IN A N ELECTRONI C DATABASE W HI CH IS PUB LICLY ACCESSIB LE WITH OUT P AY MENT O F FEE (S UCH AS THE DA T A B A S E AVAI LAB LE AT HT T P://WW W. C A 2. U S C OU R T S . G OV/) . I F N O C OPY I S S E R V E D BY R E A S ON OF T HE AVAILAB ILITY OF THE ORDER ON SUCH A DATAB ASE, TH E CITATIO N MUST INCLUDE REF ERENCE TO THAT DATABASE AND THE DOCK ET NUMB ER OF THE CASE IN WH ICH THE O RDER WAS ENTERED. At a stated te rm of the United States Court of A ppeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Daniel Patric k Moy

nihan Courthouse, 500 Pear l Street, in the City of Ne w York, on the 11 day th of De cembe r, two thousand nine. Pr e se nt: ROBERT A. K ATZ MANN, DEB RA ANN L I VI

NGSTON, Circuit Judges , L OUI S L . STANTON,

District Judge. *

________________________________________________ UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA,

Appellee , v. No. 09-1499-c r BA RRY BUKER, L OUI S STEP HENSON,2 De fe nd an ts , DO NA L D LAU B ER,

Defendant-

Appellant

.

________________________________________________ F or De fe nd ant- Ap pe lla

nt: J AR R OD W. S MI TH , Sy rac use, NY For Appellee : G WE NDOL YN C A RR O LL (Ransom P. Rey nolds, of counsel ), Assistant United States Attorney s, for Andre w T. B axter, United States Attorney for the Norther n District of Ne w York, Sy rac use, NY Appea l from the United States District Court for the Northe rn District of Ne w York (Suddaby , J. ). ON CO NSI DE RA TIO N W HEREOF , i ti s h e r e b y OR DE RE D , AD JU DG ED , and DE CREED that th e fi na l ju dg me nt o f c onvic tio n im po se d Apr il 1 3, 20 09 , is AF F IRM ED

. Def endant- Appellant Dona ld L auber appea ls from a judg ment imposed April 13, 2009 (Suddaby , J. ), se nte nc inghim pr inc ipa lly

to 1 6 mo nth s’ imp ri so nme nt. We a ssume the pa rt ie s’ familiarity

with the fac ts, procedur al history , and spec ification of issues on a ppeal. We reviewa district cour t’s sentenc e for

“‘r easona

bleness.’” Un ite d S

tates v . J as s , 569 F.3d 47, 65 ( 2d Cir. 2009) (quotingUnited States v. Book er , 543 U.S. 220, 262 (2005)). O ur
re vie w p ro c e e ds in t

wo ste ps . F ir st, we de te rm ine wh e the r t he dis tr ic t c ourt

ha s c omp lie d w ith the proc edura l require ments of the Sentenc ing Re form Ac t. Un ite d S tates v . Ca v e ra , 550 F.3d 180, 189 (2d Cir. 2008) ( en banc ). “ A d istri c t c ourt c omm its pr oc e dura l e rr or wh e re it .

. . tr e ats the Gu ide lin e s a s ma

nd ator y . . . d oe s n ot c on sid e r t

he §3 55 3( a ) f

a c tor s, . . . [or ] fa ils a de qu ate ly to expl ain its chosen sente nce.” Id. at 19 0 ( int e rn a l qu otatio n ma rk s a nd c itatio ns omi tte d) . A s to substantive rea sonablene ss, we will “set a side a district cour t’s substantive deter

mination3

only in exceptional case s where the trial cour t’s decision ca

nnot be locate d within the rang e of permissible dec isions.” Id. at 189 (interna l quotation marks, citation, and empha sis omit ted). L auber argues that the district cour t erre d in failingto consider the f actor s set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Althoug h we ha ve “r efr ained f

rom imposing any

rig orous re quirement of specific articulation [ on] t he sente ncingjudge ,” United States v. Crosby , 397 F.3d 103, 113 ( 2d Cir. 2005), abrogated on other grounds by United States v. Lake , 419 F.3d 111, 113 n.2 ( 2d Cir. 2005), in this case, the district court explicitl y stated that it had re viewed a nd considere d the fac tors outlined in § 3553(a). The ref ore, this ar gument is without m erit. The sa me is true for L a ub e r’ s argume nt t

hat th e dis tr ic t c ourt

tr e ate d th e Se nte nc ingGu ide lin e s a s ma nd ator y , in violation of United States v. Book er , 5 43 U. S. 2 20 (2 00 5) . T he re is n oth ingin t he re c or d to

s u g g e s tth atth e d i s tr i c tc o urtd i d n o tun d e r s t an d

th atth e G u i d e l i n e s ar e a dv i s o r y. As to L auber ’s ar gument that the district court improper ly relied on L auber ’s Canadia n convictions, the Canadia

n convictions wer e ac tually not used in ca lculatingL auber ’s cr iminal history cate g ory and the district cour

t did not upwardly

depar t under United States Sentenc ing Guidelines § 4A1.3. The district court wa s permitted to consider the “history and cha rac teristics of the de fenda

nt” under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), a

nd we f ind no error

in its t reatment of L auber ’s Canadian c onvictions. Finally , we disagree with L auber that his sentence is unreasona ble g iven the less seve re se ntence s imposed on his co-def endants. As the district c ourt observe d, wher eas
eac h of L auber ’s co- defe ndants had one minor past offe nse, L auber had a longcriminal history beg inning in 1991. The district court also indicate d that L auber ’s role in the of fense was greater than his co-de fenda

nts’. We have c onsidered a ll of L auber ’s other a rguments and find them without merit. For the4

fo re g oin gre a so ns , th e jud g me nt o f t he dis tr ic t c ourt

is AF F IRM ED

. FOR THE COURT: CA TH ERI

NE O’ HA GA

N WO L F E, CL ERK By :_________________________________