United States v. Young

Opinion

Case: 23-30379 Document: 64-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/07/2024

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED May 7, 2024 No. 23-30379 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk ____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Jacque Pierre Young,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 3:22-CR-183-1 ______________________________

Before Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Jacque Pierre Young pled guilty, with a plea agreement, to one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense. He was sentenced to 264 months in prison on the methamphetamine count, to be followed by a consecutive term of 60 months in prison on the firearm count.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-30379 Document: 64-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/07/2024

No. 23-30379

Young argues on appeal that the sentence imposed is substantively unreasonable. We engage in a bifurcated review of a district court’s sentencing determination, first reviewing the sentence’s procedural reasonableness before considering its substantive reasonableness. See United States v. Robinson, 741 F.3d 588, 598 (5th Cir. 2014). Because Young has not demonstrated that the district court procedurally erred, we next consider the substantive reasonableness of his sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard. See id. Sentences within or below the properly calculated guidelines range are presumed to be reasonable. United States v. Simpson, 796 F.3d 548, 557 (5th Cir. 2015) (citation omitted). The presumption of reasonableness “is rebutted only upon a showing that the sentence does not account for a factor that should receive significant weight, it gives significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or it represents a clear error of judgment in balancing sentencing factors.” United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). Young has not made such a showing. For these reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.