United States v. Abrego

153 F. App'x 292
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 9, 2005
Docket05-50013
StatusUnpublished

This text of 153 F. App'x 292 (United States v. Abrego) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Abrego, 153 F. App'x 292 (5th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: 1

Stephanie Abrego pleaded guilty to an indictment charging her with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 kilograms of marijuana. Abrego was sentenced at the bottom of the guideline imprisonment range to a 33-month term of imprisonment and to a three-year period of supervised release. She was ordered to pay a $1,000 fine. Abrego gave timely notice of her appeal.

Abrego contends that her sentence should be vacated because it was imposed pursuant to an unconstitutional mandatory guidelines system, contrary to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220,---, 125 S.Ct. 738, 768-69, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), a so-called Fanfan error. See United States v. Martinez-Lugo, 411 F.3d 597, 600 (5th Cir.2005), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 126 S.Ct. 464, — L.Ed.2d-(2005) (No. 05-6242). This court’s review is for plain error. See id.; United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 520-21 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 43, — L.Ed.2d-(2005).

Abrego cannot carry her burden of showing that the Fanfan error affected *293 her sentence. See Martinez-Lugo, 411 F.3d at 600. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the district court felt constrained by the mandatory guidelines in imposing Abrego’s sentence. See Mares, 402 F.3d at 522; see also United States v. Bringier, 405 F.3d 310, 317 n. 4 (5th Cir.) (minimum guideline sentence, without more, insufficient to carry third prong of plain-error test), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 264, — L.Ed.2d - (2005). The judgment is AFFIRMED.

1

. Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should ftot be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Mares
402 F.3d 511 (Fifth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Martinez-Lugo
411 F.3d 597 (Fifth Circuit, 2005)
United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
153 F. App'x 292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-abrego-ca5-2005.