United States v. Robert Kinsey

Opinion

Case: 19-10109 Document: 00515124293 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/19/2019

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

FILED No. 19-10109 September 19, 2019 Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ROBERT KEITH KINSEY,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13-CR-251-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, HO, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Robert Keith Kinsey challenges the 18-month above-range sentence that the district court imposed upon the revocation of his supervised release. Kinsey argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court initially pronounced a sentence that was at the bottom of the guidelines policy statement range, based on a misunderstanding of that range,

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 19-10109 Document: 00515124293 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/19/2019

No. 19-10109

and, once advised of the correct range, impermissibly and inexplicably imposed the same sentence, which was then above the policy statement range. Contrary to Kinsey’s assertions, the district court explicitly considered the appropriate factors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), including the proper advisory range of imprisonment. See United States v. Winding, 817 F.3d 910, 913 (5th Cir. 2016); United States v. Miller, 634 F.3d 841, 843-44 (5th Cir. 2011); United States v. Mathena, 23 F.3d 87, 90-93 (5th Cir. 1994). Further, the district court adequately explained the above-range sentence. See United States v. Fraga, 704 F.3d 432, 437-39 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 261-62 (5th Cir. 2009). Thus, Kinsey fails to show error, plain or otherwise. See Winding, 817 F.3d at 913. AFFIRMED.