United States v. White

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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
August 3, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-30282
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GERALD M. WHITE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 5:01-CR-50070-15
--------------------
Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Gerald M. White was convicted pursuant to
a guilty plea of conspiring to possess cocaine with intent to
distribute. He was sentenced to 12 months and a day in prison and
a three-year term of supervised release. White’s supervised
release was revoked, and he now appeals the two-year term of
imprisonment imposed following that revocation.
White contends that the district court reversibly erred in
imposing his revocation sentence. He argues that the circumstances

-- 1 of 2 --

2
of his case do not warrant the statutory maximum two-year term of
imprisonment imposed in his case.
The two-year term of imprisonment imposed following revocation
of White’s supervised release does exceed the sentencing range
indicated by the policy statements in Chapter Seven of the United
States Sentencing Guidelines, but it does not exceed the statutory
maximum term of imprisonment that the district court could have
imposed. See 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3). Accordingly, White’s
revocation sentence was neither “unreasonable” nor “plainly
unreasonable.” See United States v. Hinson, 429 F.3d 114, 120 (5th
Cir. 2005), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 1804 (2006). White has not
shown reversible error.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --