Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrance Tremaine GANT, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-12
Citations: 176 F. App'x 520
Docket Number: No. 05-30925
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrance Tremaine GANT, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 176
Pages: 520–520

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terrance Tremaine GANT, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 05-30925.
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided April 12, 2006.
Camille Ann Domingue, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Todd S. Clemons, Lafayette, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Rebecca L. Hudsmith, Federal Public Defender, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Defendant-Appellant Terrance Tremaine Gant appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy to possess and distribute cocaine and cocaine base. Relying on United States v. Cunningham,, 429 F.3d 673 (7th Cir.2005), he contends that the district court erred as a matter of law in (1) imposing an unreasonable guidelines sentence under the facts of his case and (2) doing so without first considering, in response to his request for a sentence below the applicable range, whether a guidelines sentence actually conformed to the statutory factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553.
We review sentences imposed post-Booker, only for "unreasonableness." United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Gant does not dispute that his sentence fell within a correctly calculated guidelines range, and thus is presumptively reasonable. United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 554 (5th Cir.2006). As our review of the sentencing transcript reveals that the district court meaningfully considered the § 3553 factors in fashioning Gant's sentence, he has not rebutted that presumption. See id. Gant's reliance on Seventh Circuit authority is therefore unpersuasive.
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).