FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T OCT 8, 2010 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 10 53 9 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 5 :0 9- cr-0 00 16 -CAR- CWH-1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti ff-Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us CHADW ICK J ORDAN, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l D efen 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 forth e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Oct ob er 8 , 20 10 ) Befo re PRYOR, MARTIN an d F AY, Circ ui t Jud ge s. PER CURI AM: Ch adwickJo rd anap pe al s h is 51 -m on th sen te nc e im po se d a fte r a jury fou nd hi m gu il ty of po ss es si onof afir earm by a pers on pre vi ou sl y

co nv ic te d o f a fel on yin vi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. §§ 92 2( g) (1 ) an d 9 24 (a)( 2) . Jo rd anreque st eda

51 -m on th sen te nc e in hi s s en te nc in g m em or an du m an d a t h is sen te nc in g h eari ng . Inhi s s en te nc in g m em or an du m Jo rd anals o n ot edth athi s ap pl ic ab le gu id el in e ran ge wou ldbe 51 to 63 m on th s i m pr is on m en t, b as edona to ta l o ffen se lev el of 2 2 an d acri m in al hi st ory

cat eg ory of I II. The di st ric t co urt s en te nc edJo rd anto 51 m on th s i m

pr is on m en t, the ex actsen te nc e h e reque st ed . At the sen te nc in g h eari ng , th e d is tri ctco urt ju dg e st at edth athe ha d c on si de redth e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es an d th e se nt en ci ng fact or s, p ur su an t t o 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). J or da n ra is edno ob jecti onbe fo re the di st ric t co urt t o h is sen te nc e. Jo rd anno w arg ue s t ha t h is se nt en ce i s p ro cedur al ly andsubs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le . Afte r th or ou ghrev ie w, we affi rm . Inrev ie win g s en te nc es forreas on ab le ne ss , we con du cta two -s te p i nqui ry . Uni te d S ta te s v . Pug h, 5 15 F.3d11 79 , 11 90 (11 th Cir . 20 08 ). W e m us t fi rs t

“ ‘ens ur e th atth e d is tri ctco urt co m m it te d n o s ig ni fic an t p ro cedur al erro r’” and

“ ‘the n c on si de r th e subs ta nt iv e rea so nabl en es s o f th e se nt en ce i m po se d.’” Id. (quo ti ng Gall v. Un it edSta te s, 5 52 U.S. 38 , 51 , 12 8 S . Ct. 5 86 , 59 7 (2 00 7) ). Pro cedur al erro rs in cl ud e: “ fai li ng to cal cu la te (orim pr op erl y cal cu la ti ng ) th e Gui de li ne s ra ng e, tr eat in g t he Gui de li ne s as m an da to ry , fai li ng to co ns id er the

2§ 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, s el ect in g asen te nc e b as edoncle arl y erro ne ou s fa ct s, o r fai li ng to ad equa te ly exp la in th e ch os ensen te nc e.” Id . (qu ot in g Gal l, 5 52 U.S. at 5 1, 1 28 S. Ct . at 5 97 ). W e lo okto th e § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s t o g ui de ou r subs ta nt iv e reas on ab le ne ss rev ie w. Unit edSta te s v . W in in ge ar, 4 22 F.3d12 41 , 12 46 (11 th Ci r. 20 05 ). Jo rd anarg ue s t ha t h is sen 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 ad equa te ly exp la in it s re as on s fo r im po si ng hi s 5 1- m on th se nt en ce. J or da n c on ced ed , ho wev er, atsen te nc in g a ndinhi s s en te nc in g m em or an du m

th atth e g ui de li ne ran ge th e d is tri ctco urt ap pl ie d was co rrec t. Jo rd ando es no t ar gu e o th erwi se on ap pe al .

“ [T]he p arty

who ch al le ng es th e se nt en ce b ears th e b ur de n o f es tabl is hi ng th atth e se nt en ce i s u nr eas on ab le inth e li gh t o f bo th th [e] reco rdan d t he fact or s i n se ct io n 3 55 3( a).” Un it edSta te s v . Cam pb el l, 4 91 F.3d13 06 , 13 13 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ) (quo ti ng Uni te d S ta te s v . Tall ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (11 th Cir . 20 05 )). Whe n t he di st ric t co urt i m po se s a s en te nc e withi n the gu id el in e ran ge “ do in g s o wil l n otne ces sa ril y

requi re l en gt hy exp la na ti on .” Rit a v . Uni te d S ta te s, 5 51 U.S. 33 8, 3 56 , 12 7 S . Ct. 2 45 6, 2 46 8 (2 00 7) . The d is tri ctco urt n eedon ly m ak e “ an ackno wled gm en t . . . th atitha s co ns id eredth e d efen da nt ’s arg um en ts an d t he

3fact or s i n s ect io n 3 55 3( a).” Tal le y , 43 1 F .3dat 7 86 . “ [N]oth in g . . . requi res th e

di st ric t co urt t o s ta te on th e rec or d t ha t i t h as ex pl ic it ly con si de redeach of t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s o r to di sc us s ea ch of t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s.” Un it edSta te s v . Sco tt , 42 6 F .3d13 24 , 13 29 (11 th Cir . 20 05 ). W e fi ndth atth e d is tri ctco urt co m m it te d n o p ro cedur al erro r in im po si ng Jo rd an ’s sen te nc e. At the be gi nn in g o f Jo rd an ’s sen te nc in g h eari ng , th e d is tri ct co urt ex pl ai ne d t he gu id el in e cal cu la ti on an d s ta te d i ts in te nt io n t o s en te nc e Jo rd anto 51 m on th s, the sen te nc e Jo rd anha d re qu es te d. Th e d is tri ctco urt n ot ed th atitha d c on su lt edth e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es bu t tha t i t was no t b ou ndby the m , pu rs ua ntto Uni te d S ta te s v . Boo ke r, 54 3 U.S. 2 20 , 12 5 S . Ct. 7 38 (20 05 ). The di st ric t co urt al so sp ok e o f ha vi ng rev ie wedlet te rs fro m Jo rd an ’s frie nd s, co ll eag ue s, an d fa m il y

m em be rs an d c on si de redth e § 35 53 (a) fa ct or s an d t he to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces . The d is tri ctco urt’s ex pl an at io n was su ffi ci en t, es pe ci al ly giv enth atth e co urt i m po se d t he sen te nc e Jo rd anreque st ed . Jo rd anals o a rg ue s t ha t h is sen te nc e is subs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le be cau se th e ci rcu m st an ces of h is cas e warra nt edsi gn ifi can tl y les s s ev ere p un is hm en t i n li gh t o f th e 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 fact or s. Sp eci fic al ly, Jo rd anarg ue s t ha t the di st ric t

4co urt fa il edto co ns id er J or da n’s d iff ic ul t ch il dh oo d a ndadul th oo d, h is em pl oym en t ac hi ev em en ts , andth e n atur e o f hi s o ffen se . Whe n re vi ewin g asen te nc e fo r subs ta nt iv e rea so nabl en es s, we ex am in e th e to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces an d d et erm in e whe th er the sen te nc e ach ie ve s t he se nt en ci ng go al s s ta te d i n 1 8 U.S.C. § 35 53 (a). Un it edSta te s v . Cul ve r, 59 8 F .3d 74 0, 7 53 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ); P ug h, 5 15 F.3dat 1 19 1. We ord in ari ly exp ecta se nt en ce wi th in th e g ui de li ne s ra ng e to be reas on ab le . Tall ey , 43 1 F .3d78 4, 7 88 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 5) . Furt he r, itis withi n t he di st ric t co urt’s d is cret io n t o wei gh th e § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s, an d “ ‘[w] e wil l n otsubs ti tu te ou r jud gm en t i n wei gh in g t he rel ev an t fa ct or s.’” Uni te d S ta te s v . Am ed eo , 48 7 F .3d82 3, 8 32 (11 thCir . 20 07 ) (quo ti ng Uni te d S ta te s v . W il li am s, 4 56 F.3d13 53 , 13 63 (11 th Cir . 20 06 )). W e co nc lu de th atJo rd anha s fa il edto sh ow t ha t h is sen te nc e was subs ta nt iv el y

un reas on ab le . Noton ly is J or da n’s s en te nc e withi n t he gu id el in e ran ge , itis at t he bo tt om

of t he ap pl ic ab le ran ge . See Tal le y , 43 1 F .3dat 7 88 . Tha t b ei ng th e cas e, Jo rd an ’s sen te nc e is co ns id erab ly sho rte r th anth e te n- y ear st atut ory m ax im um sen te nc e. See 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( a)(2 ). The d is tri ctco urt cal cu la te d t he gu id el in es , exp res sl y co ns id eredth e fac to rs setforth in18 U.S.C. § 3 55 3( a), an d re vi ewedlet te rs of s up po rt f ro m Jo rd an ’s frie nd s, fa mil y

an d o th ers

5ab ou t h is pe rs on al hi st ory an d c ha ract eri st ic s. Ba se d o n t hi s re co rd , andbe cau se th e se nt en ci ng co urt g av e Jo rd anth e se nt en ce h e as ke d fo r, Jo rd anha s fa il edto sh ow tha t the di st ric t co urt co m m it te d acle ar erro r of

jud gm en t i n wei gh in g t he § 3 55 3( a) fa ct or s. Fo r th es e rea so ns , we AFFIRM .

6