Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yuriana WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-11
Citations: 176 F. App'x 449
Docket Number: No. 05-50405
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yuriana WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 176
Pages: 449–450

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Yuriana WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-50405.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided April 11, 2006.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Judy Fulmer Madewell, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before JONES, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Yuriana Williams appeals her total 37-month sentence imposed following a guilty plea to conspiracy to import marijuana, importation of marijuana, conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana, and possession with intent to distribute marijuana. Williams argues that her sentence is unreasonable because the district court failed to account for her history and characteristics in imposing sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(1).
Under the discretionary sentencing scheme established by United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), district courts retain the duty to consider the Sentencing Guidelines along with the sentencing factors set forth in § 3553(a). United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 518-19 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005). Williams's sentence is with the guidelines range and is presumptively reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 553-55 (5th Cir.2006). We infer in our reasonableness review that the district court considered the § 3553(a) factors, including Williams's history and characteristics, in imposing sentence. See United States v. Smith, — F.3d -, No. 05-30313, 440 F.3d 704, 2006 WL 367011 at *2 (5th Cir. Feb.17, 2006); Alonzo, 435 F.3d at 554.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.