United States v. Singleton

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
December 13, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-50860
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JASON SCOTT SINGLETON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 6:97-CR-20-1
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jason Scott Singleton appeals the sentence imposed after the
revocation of his supervised release. Singleton, who was
convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute
methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846,
argues that the district court erred by failing to explicitly or
implicitly consider the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) when making its decision to run his federal sentence
consecutively to his undischarged state sentence. Because he
raises this issue for the first time on appeal, our review is for

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 05-50860
-2-
plain error. See United States v. Akpan, 407 F.3d 360, 378 (5th
Cir. 2005).
Singleton does not argue that his sentence was unreasonable,
that his sentencing guidelines range was improperly calculated,
or that the district court’s order that his federal sentence run
consecutively to his undischarged state sentence was contrary to
the applicable Sentencing Guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3.
Accordingly, it is inferred that the district court considered
all of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors for a fair sentence set
forth in the Guidelines. See United States v. Candia, 454 F.3d
468, 472-73 (5th Cir. 2006). Singleton’s sentence is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --