United States v. Stanphill

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT December 30, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-60451
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
DEBBIE STANPHILL
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 1:03-CR-62-ALL-M
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JONES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Debbie Stanphill appeals the 36-month sentence imposed by
the district court upon revocation of her probation. She argues
that the district court erred in departing upward from the
sentencing guideline range of three to nine months. See U.S.S.G.
§§ 7B1.1(a)(3), 7B1.4(a).
Considering that Stanphill’s sentence for the offense of
conviction was the result of a downward departure, an upward
departure was authorized. See U.S.S.G. § 7B1.4, comment. (n.4).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
No. 04-60451
-2-
The district court appropriately considered Stanphill’s need for
drug treatment, and the 36-month sentence was well below the
statutory maximum imprisonment term of 20 years. See 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a)(2)(D); 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C); United States v. Pena,
125 F.3d 285, 286-87 (5th Cir. 1997). The sentence was therefore
legal. See Pena, 125 F.3d at 288. The district court did not
plainly err or abuse its discretion.
AFFIRMED.