United States v. David Shelton , 563 F. App'x 308 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 13-30900      Document: 00512598196         Page: 1    Date Filed: 04/16/2014
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    No. 13-30900                         April 16, 2014
    Summary Calendar
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    DAVID SHELTON,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 2:12-CR-275-1
    Before JOLLY, DeMOSS, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    David Shelton appeals from his conviction of possessing child
    pornography, for which he received a sentence of 240 months of imprisonment.
    He contends that this court should not give a presumption of reasonableness
    to a sentence calculated using U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2 because that guideline section
    is not based on empirical evidence; he correctly concedes that this argument is
    foreclosed by United States v. Miller, 
    665 F.3d 114
     (5th Cir. 2011).
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 13-30900    Document: 00512598196      Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/16/2014
    No. 13-30900
    Apart from the argument that there should be no presumption of
    reasonableness, Shelton argues that his sentence was substantively
    unreasonable because he committed a possession offense, which is less serious
    than offenses involving the production, transportation, or distribution of
    pornography. He avers that he merely downloaded images, did not share those
    images, and did not produce child pornography. He states that he has no
    criminal history, that he is a decorated veteran, that he has always been
    employed, and that he has a supportive family.
    No objection was made to the substantive reasonableness of the sentence
    at the sentencing hearing. Our review is for plain error. See United States v.
    Peltier, 
    505 F.3d 389
    , 390-92 (5th Cir. 2007). Shelton has failed to rebut the
    presumption of correctness given to his within-range sentence. See United
    States v. Alonzo, 
    435 F.3d 551
    , 554 (5th Cir. 2006). The district court found
    that Shelton distributed pornography, the record indicated that he was
    viewing and possessing pornography contemporaneously with the molestation
    of a child, and many of the images and videos Shelton possessed are very
    disturbing. Shelton’s arguments as to his military service, his status as a first
    offender, his employment service, and his supportive family seek to reweigh
    the factors relevant to his sentencing, and we will not engage in reweighing
    those factors. See United States v. McElwee, 
    646 F.3d 328
    , 344 (5th Cir. 2011).
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-30900

Citation Numbers: 563 F. App'x 308

Judges: DeMOSS, Elrod, Jolly, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/16/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023