Court Opinion

ID: 9412901
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-01 22:00:28.798443+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:19.139160
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-30491     Document: 00516842804         Page: 1     Date Filed: 08/01/2023

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

                                ____________                           FILED
                                                                  August 1, 2023
                                  No. 22-30491                    Lyle W. Cayce
                                Summary Calendar                       Clerk
                                ____________

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Darius Williams,

                                           Defendant—Appellant.
                  ______________________________

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                     for the Eastern District of Louisiana
                           USDC No. 2:20-CR-145-1
                  ______________________________

   Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Darius Williams appeals his 80-month sentence for possessing a
   firearm as a convicted felon. Although the advisory guidelines range was 24-
   30 months of imprisonment, the district court applied an upward variance to

          _____________________
          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 22-30491      Document: 00516842804           Page: 2    Date Filed: 08/01/2023

                                     No. 22-30491

   80 months of imprisonment.         Williams challenges the procedural and
   substantive reasonableness of his sentence.
          Williams preserved both of these issues, so we review under a
   deferential abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38,
   128 (2007). Williams offers a procedural argument that the district court
   should have provided more explanation during sentencing. He also argues
   that the Guidelines variance sentence was substantially unreasonable on its
   face and because it was supported only by evidence of general neighborhood
   conditions.
          We find the district court did not procedurally abuse its discretion.
   The court informed both parties it was considering a variance and allowed
   each to present argument and evidence. The court then stated which
   evidence it found supported an above-guidelines sentence, and the district
   court’s reasons addressed the sentencing factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
   Accordingly, the sentence was rooted in the sentencing factors. See United
   States v. Bostic, 970 F.3d 607, 611 (5th Cir. 2020); United States v. Diaz
   Sanchez, 714 F.3d 289, 294 (5th Cir. 2013).
          We find the district court did not substantively abuse its discretion.
   The district court established reliability and is not otherwise required to
   follow the rules of evidence at sentencing. United States v. Moton, 951 F.3d
   639, 645 (5th Cir. 2020). Unadjudicated conduct, moreover, may be taken
   into account at sentencing where, as here, the evidence bears sufficient
   indicia of reliability. United States v. Parkerson, 984 F.3d 1124, 1129 (5th Cir.
   2021). To the extent Williams argues general neighborhood conditions were
   imputed to him, only individualized evidence was cited by the district court
   as a basis for sentencing.
          AFFIRMED.

                                              2