Court Opinion

ID: 9828019
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 18:01:20.400752+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:03:42.128734
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30101         Document: 00516881447             Page: 1      Date Filed: 09/01/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 23-30101                                   FILED
                                     Summary Calendar                          September 1, 2023
                                     ____________                                Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                      Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Alfred Stewart, III,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 2:22-CR-65-2
                      ______________________________

   Before Barksdale, Engelhardt, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Alfred Stewart, III, challenges the sentence imposed following his
   convictions for: conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute
   cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846; possession with intent to distribute
   cocaine, cocaine base, and methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
   §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C); felon in possession of firearm and ammunition, in

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30101      Document: 00516881447           Page: 2    Date Filed: 09/01/2023

                                     No. 23-30101

   violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2); and possession of a firearm in
   furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
   § 924(c)(1)(A). He contends his within-Guidelines 97-months’ sentence,
   imposed after denial of his downward-variance motion, is substantively
   unreasonable.
          Although post-Booker, the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only,
   the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly
   calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
   38, 46, 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved
   objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness
   under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado-
   Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751–53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues
   preserved in district court, as in this instance, its application of the
   Guidelines is reviewed de novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g.,
   United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008).
          Stewart fails to show his sentence does not account for a factor that
   should receive significant weight, gives significant weight to an irrelevant or
   improper factor, or represents a clear error of judgment in balancing
   sentencing factors. E.g., United States v. Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209, 214 (5th Cir.
   2013) (outlining abuse of discretion for within-Guidelines sentence). The
   record reflects the district court considered Stewart’s contentions in support
   of a below-Guidelines sentence but rejected them. Ultimately, Stewart
   disagrees with the sentence imposed by the district court and fails to
   overcome the presumption that the court imposed a reasonable sentence. See
   United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010). He has not shown
   his sentence is substantively unreasonable.
          To the extent Stewart might present a Second Amendment challenge
   to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession), he has abandoned it by failing

                                          2
Case: 23-30101     Document: 00516881447           Page: 3   Date Filed: 09/01/2023

                                    No. 23-30101

   to adequately brief it. E.g., United States v. Scroggins, 599 F.3d 433, 446–47
   (5th Cir. 2010) (“It is not enough to merely mention or allude to a legal
   theory.” (citation omitted)).
          AFFIRMED.

                                         3