F ILED U.S. COURT O F APP EALS EL EV EN TH C IRC UIT May 6 , 2 008 T HOMA S K. KA HN CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

N o. 07- 1118 2 Non-A rgum ent Calendar

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- D. C. Docket N o. 05-20808 -CR- CMA UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us GEORGE JAMES, J R., D ef en dant- Appe llant.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- - Appe al f ro m the U nit ed

S ta te s D istri ct

Co urt fo r the S outhe rnD istri ct

of F lor ida

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

(M ay 6 , 200 8) Be fo re E D MO N D SO N , Ch ie f Judg e, T JO FL A T and P RY O R, Ci rc uit Jud ge s. PE R CU RIA M: De fendant-Appellant G eorge Jam es Jr. appeals his 172 -m onth sentence im pose d a ft er

he ple d gu ilty

to poss es sio n w ithint en t t o di str ibu te f ive gr am s orNo arg ument is made on appea l that the district court e rre d by denying a

downwar d depar

ture * ba se d on re du c e d me nta l c a pa c ity ; and no argume nt is m a de that th e dis tr ic t c ourt fa ile d to c a lc ulate corr ectly the guidelines rang e. 2 m or e of c oc ai ne ba se , in vio la tio n of 21 U . S. C. § 84 1( a) (1 ). N o r ev er sib le e rr or h a s b e e n s h o w n ; w e a f

f i rm. D ef en dant f ac ed astatut or y m ini m um se nte nc e of

f ive y ears and a m axim um term of forty y ears. T he PSI concluded that Defendant -- a career of fe nde r -- w as sub

j ec t t o agui de lin e range of 188 to 235 m onths. D ef

en dant re que ste d ( i) c re dit

f or ti m e spe nt i n st at e cu sto dy f or an un re la te d c onvi ct ion , ( ii) a se nte nc e co nc ur

re nt w ithastate se nte nc e, ( iii ) a dow nw ar d de part ur e ba se d on dim inish ed m ental capacity , and (iv) a downward variance based on hi s m ental il ln es se s an d d iff

ic ul t upb rin gi ng . The d is tri ctco ur t ac co m m od at edth e fi rs t t wo re que sts : the se nte nc e im pose d r uns co nc ur

re ntl y w ithastate se nte nc e an d is 16 m onth s below the guideline range (to correc t a delay betwee n Def

endant’ s federa l indictm ent and the com

m encem ent of feder al custody ). N o further downw ard de part ur e or vari an ce w as gr an te d. D ef en dant r ai se s asin gle se nte nc ing iss ue on appeal: whether the sentence im posed was unreasonable under the section 35 53(a) factors, 18 U. S. C. § 355 3(a), in the ligh t of De fendant’ s dim inish ed m ental ca pa ci ty and d if fi cu lt ch ildhood . *3

Appellate r eview of

the subst antive reasonableness of a sentence -- whether in si de or o ut si de th e g ui de li ne s ra ng e -- i s u nd er an ab us e-o f- d is cret io n s ta nd ard . G al l v. U nit ed

S ta te s, 128 S . Ct . 586 , 597 ( 2007 ). T his r ev ie wis de fe re nti al ; and

“ the party w ho c ha lle nge s th e se nte nc e be ar s th e bur de n of e sta bli shi ng tha t the se nte nc e is unr ea sona

ble in the li ght

of both [ the ] r ec or d and the f ac tor s inse ct ion 3553 (a ). ” U nit ed

S ta te s v. T al le y , 431 F . 3d 7 84, 788 ( 11 Ci r. 200 5) . A nd e ve n if th anappe llate c ourt di sa gr ee s w iththe w ei ght the dis tr ic t c ourt a ff

or de d th e se ct ion 3553 (a ) fa ct or s, w e w ill r ev er se onl y if the f ina l se nte nc e im

pose d li es out sid e the range of r ea sona ble se nte nc es . S ee U nit ed S ta te s v. Mc Br ide , 511 F . 3d 1293 ,1297-98 (11 Cir. 2007 ). th The tr anscript of the sentencing hearing m akes it clear that the district court co nsi de re d th e se ct ion355 3( a) f ac tor s; and the dis tr ic t c ourt no te d sp ec if ic al ly D ef en dant’ s ( i) m en ta l c ap ac ity and the psy ch olo gic al r ep orts s ubm itt ed on h is be ha lf , ( ii) f am ily sit ua tio n, ( iii ) dif

fi cu lt ch ildhood , and ( iv) pos iti ve inf lue nc e of D ef en dant’ s ne wgir lf

ri en d. B ut the dis tr ic t c ourt w as unp er sua de d th at the se fa ct or s j ust if

ie d avari an ce f

ro m the a dvi sor

y gui de lin e range . W e cannot say the 172- m onth se nte nc e im

pose d - - w el l be lowthe statut or y m ax im um of 480 m onths an d 16 m onths b el owthe lowe nd o f the gui de lin e range - - w as “ out sid e the r an ge of r ea sona ble se nte nc es dic ta te d by the f ac ts o f the c as e. ” U nit ed S ta te s v.4

W ill iam s, 456 F . 3d 1 353, 136 3 ( 11 Ci r. 200 6) , c er t. dis m iss ed

127 S . Ct . 304 0 th (2 007) , abr oga te d onoth er gr ound s K im

br oughv. U nit ed

S ta te s, 128 S . Ct . 558 (2007). N o clear error

of j udgm ent in weighing th e section 3553 (a) factors has be ensho w n. AFFIR MED.