United States v. Poore

* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 6, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-51250
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BRETT ROLLAND POORE,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(1:05-CR-90-1)
--------------------
Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Brett Rolland Poore pleaded guilty without
the benefit of a plea agreement to conspiracy to possess with the
intent to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine and
possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of
methamphetamine. Finding that Poore was a career criminal, the
district court sentenced him on each count to 262 months in prison
and five years of supervised release, the terms to run
concurrently.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Poore appeals, arguing that his sentence, imposed after the
Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220
(2005), was unreasonable because it was greater than necessary to
meet the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
Here, the district court fulfilled its duty to consider all of
the § 3553 factors and sentenced Poore to 262 months of
imprisonment, which was the lowest end of the sentencing guidelines
range. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir.),
cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 43 (2005). This sentence is within
the properly calculated advisory guidelines range and is
presumptively reasonable. United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551,
554-55 (5th Cir. 2006). There is no indication that the sentence
imposed was unreasonable. See Mares, 402 F.3d at 519. The
district court’s judgment is
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --