Court Opinion

ID: 9382762
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-03-28 18:00:32.077319+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:41.603506
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-60429         Document: 00516691358             Page: 1      Date Filed: 03/28/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                               United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 22-60429
                                     Summary Calendar                                 FILED
                                     ____________                                March 28, 2023
                                                                                 Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                          Clerk

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Daniel Blake Coulston,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Northern District of Mississippi
                                USDC No. 3:20-CR-47-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Jolly, Jones, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Daniel Blake Coulston appeals the 210-month, within-guidelines
   sentence imposed following a guilty plea to distribution of child pornography.
   He argues that the district court imposed a substantively unreasonable
   sentence and failed to properly weigh the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing
   factors. This argument was not presented to the district court, and he did

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-60429      Document: 00516691358          Page: 2    Date Filed: 03/28/2023

                                    No. 22-60429

   not request a downward variance. We therefore review for plain error. See
   United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009). To
   establish plain error, an appellant must show that the district court
   committed a clear or obvious error that affected his substantial rights. Puckett
   v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).
          Coulston has failed to show that there was any error in the district
   court’s balancing of the sentencing factors, let alone showing an error that
   affected his substantial rights. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186
   (5th Cir. 2009); see also Puckett, 556 U.S. at 135. The district court properly
   addressed all relevant factors and explained its reasons for the imposed
   sentence. We will not reweigh the sentencing factors, as Coulston requests.
   See United States v. Hernandez, 876 F.3d 161, 167 (5th Cir. 2017) (per curiam).
   To the extent Coulston encourages us to apply a different standard of review
   on appeal or alter the substantive reasonableness analysis, such is prohibited
   by our rule of orderliness. See Jacobs v. Nat’l Drug Intel. Ctr., 548 F.3d 375,
   378 (5th Cir. 2008).
                                                                   AFFIRMED.

                                          2