UNITED STATES v. SANFORD (2018)

Dontrelle Deshaun Sanford pleaded guilty to possession of contraband in a Federal Correctional Institution, and he was sentenced to six and a half months of imprisonment, to be served consecutively to his underlying sentence, after he was given credit for time served in the county detention center. He contends that the sentence, which was within the applicable guidelines range of imprisonment, is substantively unreasonable.

We review the substantive reasonableness of a sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). Here, the district court considered Sanford’s request for time served based on administrative penalties already imposed by the Bureau of Prisons but determined that the sentence was appropriate in light of Sanford’s criminal history and its belief that a lower sentence would not provide the required deterrent effect. Sanford’s arguments are not sufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence. See United States v. Rashad, 687 F.3d 637, 644 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010).

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

PER CURIAM: * FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.