United States v. Clark

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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
March 5, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
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.

-- 1 of 2 --

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.

-- 2 of 2 --