United States v. David Beasley

Case: 13-60055 Document: 00512489778 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/06/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 13-60055 January 6, 2014
Summary Calendar
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
DAVID BEASLEY,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 2:10-CR-78-5
Before KING, DeMOSS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
David Beasley pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud through
a telemarketing scheme that victimized ten or more persons over the age of 55.
Beasley was sentenced to 262 months of imprisonment. We vacated Beasley’s
sentence and remanded the case because the district court misapplied the
Sentencing Guidelines. On remand, Beasley’s advisory guidelines sentencing
range was 168 to 210 months in prison. Within that range, the district court
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-60055 Document: 00512489778 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/06/2014
No. 13-60055
sentenced Beasley to 210 months of imprisonment. Beasley now challenges
the reasonableness of his 210-month sentence alleging that the district court
failed to consider his post-sentence rehabilitation.
“A discretionary sentence imposed within a properly calculated
guidelines range is presumptively reasonable.” United States v. Campos-
Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 338 (5th Cir. 2008). Here, the record reflects that
the district court considered information regarding Beasley’s post-sentence
rehabilitation efforts. Beasley’s “disagreement with the propriety of the
sentence imposed does not suffice to rebut the presumption of reasonableness
that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence.” United States v. Ruiz, 621
F.3d 390, 398 (5th Cir. 2010).
AFFIRMED.
2