United States v. Federmann

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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
July 5, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-50615
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RICHARD FEDERMANN,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:04-CR-216-ALL
--------------------
Before REAVLEY, STEWART and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Richard Federmann appeals the 546-month sentence imposed
following his guilty-plea conviction of possession with intent to
distribute heroin, distribution of heroin to a person under 21
years of age, and aiding and abetting. He contends that the
sentence, which exceeded the guideline range of 262 to 327 months
of imprisonment, was unreasonable. He argues that the district
court failed to properly articulate reasons for the sentence and
improperly considered his age in determining the sentence.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 05-50615
-2-
We review the sentence for reasonableness. See United
States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). The district court considered the
Sentencing Guidelines, the sentencing factors set forth in 18
U.S.C. § 3553(a), and thoroughly articulated the reasons for
imposing a non-Guidelines sentence in this case. See United
States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir. 2006). A review of
those reasons shows that the district court did not fail to
account for a sentencing factor that should have received
significant weight, did not give significant weight to an
irrelevant or improper factor, nor was the sentence imposed the
result of clear error in balancing the sentencing factors. Id.
at 708. Accordingly, the judgment is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --