Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

United States v. Clark, 06-30700 (2007)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Number: 06-30700 Visitors: 45
Filed: Mar. 05, 2007
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT March 5, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 06-30700 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus WILLIAM TODD CLARK, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 5:05-CR-50093 - Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* William Todd Clark appeals the sentence imp
More
                                                       United States Court of Appeals
                                                                Fifth Circuit
                                                             F I L E D
               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  March 5, 2007

                                                         Charles R. Fulbruge III
                                                                 Clerk
                           No. 06-30700
                         Summary Calendar


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                      Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

WILLIAM TODD CLARK,

                                      Defendant-Appellant.

                        --------------------
           Appeal from the United States District Court
               for the Western District of Louisiana
                       USDC No. 5:05-CR-50093
                        --------------------

Before DeMOSS, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     William Todd Clark appeals the sentence imposed following

his guilty plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a

firearm.   18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).   Clark argues that his sentence

of 71 months of imprisonment, which was at the top of the

applicable advisory sentencing guideline range, is unreasonable

under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) because it was greater than necessary

to achieve the goals of sentencing.

     Clark’s sentence was within a properly calculated advisory

guideline range and is presumed reasonable.     See United States v.

     *
       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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
                           No. 06-30700
                                -2-

Alonzo, 
435 F.3d 551
, 554 (5th Cir. 2006).   Little explanation of

a sentence is required when a district court expressly imposes a

sentence within the advisory guideline range.   United States v.

Mares, 
402 F.3d 511
, 519 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
126 S. Ct. 43
(2005).   Clark has failed to demonstrate that his properly

calculated Guidelines sentence was unreasonable, and he is

therefore not entitled to relief.   See 
Alonzo, 435 F.3d at 554
.

     Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer