United States v. Christopher Sanchez ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 19-10310      Document: 00515222223         Page: 1    Date Filed: 12/04/2019
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    No. 19-10310
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    Summary Calendar                    December 4, 2019
    Lyle W. Cayce
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                                                    Clerk
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    CHRISTOPHER SANCHEZ,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 1:07-CR-36-1
    Before SMITH, DENNIS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Christopher Sanchez appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of
    his supervised release. The district court varied upward from the advisory
    range and sentenced Sanchez to 18 months of imprisonment and 18 months of
    supervised release.       Sanchez contends that the district court committed
    procedural error by failing to provide an adequate explanation for the chosen
    sentence.
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 19-10310       Document: 00515222223     Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/04/2019
    No. 19-10310
    Because Sanchez did not preserve this claim of procedural error for
    appeal by first raising it in the district court, plain error review applies. See
    United States v. Whitelaw, 
    580 F.3d 256
    , 259, 261-62 (5th Cir. 2009). Sanchez
    acknowledges that plain error review applies under our precedent, but he
    wishes to preserve for further review the argument that an objection to the
    adequacy of the explanation of the sentence is not required to preserve the
    error.
    The record reflects that the district court implicitly considered Sanchez’s
    arguments for a lesser sentence and expressly stated that the chosen sentence
    addressed “the issues of adequate deterrence and protection of the public.” In
    the context of Sanchez’s case, the district court’s stated reasons are sufficient
    to show that it considered the arguments presented and had a reasoned basis
    for imposing an above-range sentence. See 
    id. at 261.
    Sanchez has not shown
    clear or obvious error.
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-10310

Filed Date: 12/4/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/4/2019