United States v. Linda Bunch ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 13-30169       Document: 00512480661         Page: 1     Date Filed: 12/23/2013
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    December 23, 2013
    No. 13-30169
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    LINDA C. BUNCH,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 3:10-CR-198-1
    Before DAVIS, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Linda C. Bunch appeals the 27-month, within-guidelines sentence imposed
    following her guilty plea to conspiracy to import and distribute human growth
    hormone. Bunch argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying
    her motion to withdraw her guilty plea and that her sentence is greater than
    necessary to meet the sentencing goals of 
    18 U.S.C. § 3553
    (a).
    Bunch’s argument is inadequate to demonstrate a fair and just reason for
    the withdrawal of her guilty plea. See United States v. Powell, 
    354 F.3d 362
    , 370
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-30169     Document: 00512480661     Page: 2   Date Filed: 12/23/2013
    No. 13-30169
    (5th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its discretion by
    denying her motion. See 
    id.
    Because Bunch did not raise her substantive reasonableness argument in
    the district court, we review for plain error only. See United States v. Peltier,
    
    505 F.3d 389
    , 392 (5th Cir. 2007). The record reflects that the district court
    expressly considered the relevant § 3553(a) factors as well as Bunch’s arguments
    for mitigating her sentence but explicitly overruled her arguments and
    concluded that a within-guidelines sentence was appropriate. See United States
    v. Rodriguez, 
    523 F.3d 519
    , 525 (5th Cir. 2008). Accordingly, we decline Bunch’s
    invitation to reweigh the § 3553(a) factors because “the sentencing judge is in a
    superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with
    respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 
    531 F.3d 337
    , 339 (5th Cir. 2008).
    Bunch’s general disagreement with the propriety of her sentence and the
    district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors is insufficient to rebut the
    presumption of reasonableness that attaches to a within-guidelines sentence.
    See United States v. Ruiz, 
    621 F.3d 390
    , 398 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v.
    Cooks, 
    589 F.3d 173
    , 186 (5th Cir. 2009). Bunch has not demonstrated that the
    district court committed error, plain or otherwise, by sentencing her to a within-
    guidelines, 27-month prison term. See Gall v. United States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51
    (2007); Peltier, 
    505 F.3d at 392
    . Accordingly, the judgment of the district court
    is AFFIRMED.
    2