United States v. George Chivers
This text of 559 F. App'x 307 (United States v. George Chivers) 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.
Opinion
George Brent Chivers appeals the 57-month sentence imposed on remand from this court. Chivers, who was convicted of one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and two counts of aiding and abetting mail fraud, contends that his above-guidelines sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court failed to explain the sentence adequately. He also argues that the sentence violates his due process rights because it resulted from judicial vindictiveness.
*308 Chivers has failed to demonstrate that the district court plainly erred by failing to explain the sentence adequately. When imposing the 57-month sentence, the district court stated that it considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, his history of violence against women, and his behavior at the resentencing hearing. See United States v. Key, 599 F.3d 469, 474-75 (5th Cir.2010). He has also failed to demonstrate that the sentence resulted from judicial vindictiveness; the sentence received on resentencing was not harsher than the sentence received at sentencing. See United States v. Moore, 997 F.2d 30, 37-38 (5th Cir.1993). Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
559 F. App'x 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-george-chivers-ca5-2014.