Court Opinion

ID: 9368791
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-07 01:00:25.08601+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:10.983431
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50322        Document: 00516636518             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/06/2023

             United States Court of Appeals
                  for the Fifth Circuit
                                     ____________
                                                                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                       Fifth Circuit
                                      No. 22-50322
                                    Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                    ____________                               February 6, 2023
                                                                                Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                         Clerk

                                                                     Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                            versus

   Reginald Dwayne Watson,

                                              Defendant—Appellant.
                     ______________________________

                     Appeal from the United States District Court
                          for the Western District of Texas
                              USDC No. 7:09-CR-198-1
                     ______________________________

   Before Smith, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
         Reginald Watson, federal prisoner #17968-280, appeals the sentence
   imposed following revocation of his supervised release. Watson maintains
   that the 60-month concurrent sentences show a clear error of judgment in
   balancing the sentencing factors.
         The record reflects that the district court’s justification for imposing

         _____________________
         *
             This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50322      Document: 00516636518          Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/06/2023

                                    No. 22-50322

   the above-guidelines revocation sentence was reasoned, fact-specific, and
   consistent with the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Warren,
   720 F.3d 321, 332–33 (5th Cir. 2013). The court undertook an individualized
   assessment of the facts and concluded that concurrent 60-month terms were
   proper to satisfy the aims of § 3553(a). There is no indication that the court
   did not account for a factor that should have received significant weight, gave
   significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or made a clear error of
   judgment in balancing the factors. See Warren, 720 F.3d at 332.
          Watson’s theory that the sentence does not demonstrate an accurate
   evaluation or application of the factors reflects nothing more than his dis-
   agreement with the district court’s weighing of the factors. His displeasure
   with the weight given to particular factors does not justify reversal. See id.
   That we could reasonably have held that a different sentence was proper does
   not render the sentence unreasonable. Id. The record otherwise reflects that
   the decision to impose 60-month concurrent sentences was not an abuse of
   discretion. See id. at 332–33.
          The judgment is AFFIRMED.

                                          2