UNITED STATES v. THORNTON (2020)

Ronald Thornton, Sr., pleaded guilty of theft of government funds and was sentenced, above the advisory guidelines range, to 60 months of imprisonment. On appeal, he challenges the substantive reasonableness of the sentence on the ground that it does not sufficiently take into account his poor health and the improvements he made in overcoming substance abuse issues.

We have reviewed the substantive reasonableness of the sentence for an abuse of discretion and in light of the sentencing factors in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 46, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Fraga, 704 F.3d 432, 437 (5th Cir. 2013). Thornton’s argument evinces his disagreement with the balance that the district court struck among the sentencing factors. A disagreement, whether Thornton’s or ours, with the weighing of the factors is insufficient to show that the sentence is unreasonable. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 51, 128 S.Ct. 586−52.

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PER CURIAM:* FN* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.