### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 12-60219 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. ATHENA MARIE BYRD, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:11-CR-46-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Athena Marie Byrd pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to kidnap for

ransom and one count of aiding and abetting in kidnapping. The district court sente n ced Byrd at the bottom of the guidelines range of imprisonment, to 235 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release. Byrd appeals her sentence of imprisonment, arguing that the sent e n c e was substantively unreasonable. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Janu ary22 , 20 13 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedthat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 12-60219 Document: 00512120273 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/22/2013No. 12-60219

We review sentences for reasonableness b y e n g aging in a bifurcated review. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); United States v. CisnerosGutierrez , 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). First, we must ensure that the sentencing court committed no significant procedural error. Gall , 552 U.S. at 51. If the sentenc i n g d ecision is procedurally sound, we should then consider the

“ s u b s t a n t i v e r e a s o n ab l e n e s s o f t h e s e n t e n c e i m p o s e d u n d e r a n abuse-of-discretion standard.” Id. Byrd raises no claim of procedural error and challenges only her sentence’s substantive reasonableness. When, as here, the district court imposes a sentence wi th i n a properly calculated guidelines range, the sentence is entitled to a pr e s u m p tion of reasonableness. United States v. Alonzo , 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir. 2006). Byrd attempts to rebut the presumption of reasonableness, asserting that the district court failed to consider certain factors that should have received significant weight and that the sentence represents a clear error of judgment in balancing the sentencing factors. Sh e n o t e s i n this regard that she suffered a lack of gu i d a nce as a youth and that she suffers from addiction to heroin and methamphetamine. She also emphasizes her retu r n t o the scene of the crime with the intention of checking on the victim and her cooperation with the Government, which she argues evidence remorse and rehabilitation. Byrd essentially seeks to have her sentence vacated based on a reweighing of the § 3553(a) factors on appea l

. “ [T] h e sentencing judge is in a superior position to find f

a c t s a n d judge their import under § 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos-Maldonado , 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008). That we “might reasonably have concluded that a diff e rent sentence was appropriate is insufficient to justify reversal of the district court.” Ga l l , 552 U.S. at 51. Byrd’s disagreement with the propriety of the sentence imposed does not suffice to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that

a t t a c h e s to the within-guidelines sentence imposed by the district court. See United States v. Gomez-Herrera , 523 F.3d 554, 565-66 (5th Cir. 2 008). AFFIRMED.
2 Case: 12-60219 Document: 00512120273 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/22/2013