Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Orlean Arturo VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-05-17
Citations: 428 F. App'x 273
Docket Number: No. 10-10926
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Orlean Arturo VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before DAVIS, SMITH and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 428
Pages: 273–274

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Orlean Arturo VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-10926
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
May 17, 2011.
Nancy E. Larson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
John Steven Bush, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before DAVIS, SMITH and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Orlean Arturo Velasquez appeals the sentence imposed for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A) and 846. The district court sentenced him to 135 months of imprisonment and five years of supervised release.
There was no error, plain or otherwise, in the district court's application of the drug Guideline, U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, rather than the robbery Guideline, § 2B3.1, to calculate the guidelines range. See § lB1.2(a); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual app. A, pp. 556-57 (2009); cf. United States v. Loe, 248 F.3d 449, 463 (5th Cir.2001).
Velasquez has failed to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that we apply to his guidelines sentence and, therefore, has shown no error with respect to the substantive reasonableness of his sentence. See United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir.2008).
The judgment of the district court is 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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.