United States v. Huckaby

Case: 21-10836 Document: 00516288972 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2022
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 21, 2022
No. 21-10836 Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Brittany Ann Huckaby,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:15-CR-180-1
Before Jolly, Willett, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Brittany Ann Huckaby appeals the substantive reasonableness of her
24-month revocation sentence. She preserved the issue for appeal by arguing
for a sentence within the policy statement range. See Holguin-Hernandez
v. United States, 140 S. Ct. 762, 766–67 (2020).
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-10836 Document: 00516288972 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2022
No. 21-10836
Preserved challenges to revocation sentences are reviewed under
18 U.S.C. § 3742(a)’s “plainly unreasonable” standard. United States
v. Miller, 634 F.3d 841, 843 (5th Cir. 2011). We first evaluate whether the
district court committed a significant procedural error and then consider the
substantive reasonableness of the sentence under an abuse-of-discretion
standard, “examining the totality of the circumstances.” United States v.
Warren, 720 F.3d 321, 326, 332 (5th Cir. 2013) (citation omitted). “A
[revocation] sentence is substantively unreasonable if it (1) does not account
for a factor that should have received significant weight, (2) gives significant
weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or (3) represents a clear error of
judgment in balancing the sentencing factors.” Id. at 332 (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted).
We conclude that Huckaby’s revocation sentence does not give
weight to an improper factor. The record does not show that rehabilitation
was a dominant factor, if any, in the sentence imposed. See id.; see also United
States v. Walker, 742 F.3d 614, 616 (5th Cir. 2014). The district court’s
judgment is AFFIRMED.
2