Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raul Alfredo GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-06
Citations: 166 F. App'x 107
Docket Number: Nos. 05-40424, 05-40448
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raul Alfredo GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before KING, DeMOSS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 166
Pages: 107–108

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Raul Alfredo GONZALEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 05-40424, 05-40448.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Feb. 6, 2006.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Laura Fletcher Leavitt, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, DeMOSS and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Raul Alfredo Gonzalez appeals the 18-month sentence imposed upon revocation of the supervised release term imposed when he was sentenced on his escape conviction. He argues that the 18-month sentence exceeds the statutory maximum under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000).
Booker left intact the statutory provisions governing supervised release. United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 117-18 (5th Cir.2005). The principles of Apprendi and Blakely, as developed in Booker, do not apply to revocations of supervised release. See id. at 118-19. Gonzalez's 18-month sentence was neither unreasonable nor plainly unreasonable, as it did not exceed the statutory maximum term of imprisonment of two years. See id. at 120; 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.