United States v. Christopher Gammon , 670 F. App'x 880 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 16-50156      Document: 00513774416         Page: 1    Date Filed: 11/28/2016
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 16-50156                                 FILED
    Summary Calendar                        November 28, 2016
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    CHRISTOPHER CHAD GAMMON,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. 7:15-CR-186-1
    Before JOLLY, SMITH, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Christopher Chad Gammon appeals his conviction and sentence for
    failing to register as a sex offender. Gammon has been released from prison
    but challenges the three-year term of supervised release that he is still serving.
    Gammon first contends that the district court committed plain error by
    initially advising him that he faced a supervised release term of five years to
    life, when he actually faced a term of only one to three years. Any error did
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-50156    Document: 00513774416    Page: 2   Date Filed: 11/28/2016
    No. 16-50156
    not affect Gammon’s substantial rights because there is no reasonable
    probability that the correct and more favorable information would have
    dissuaded him from pleading guilty. See United States v. Dominguez Benitez,
    
    542 U.S. 74
    , 83 (2004); United States v. Williams, 
    120 F.3d 575
    , 578 (5th Cir.
    1997).
    Concerning the three-year term of supervised release, Gammon fails to
    show that the district court committed a procedural error by determining that
    Gammon was a Tier II sex offender. See Gall v. United States, 
    552 U.S. 38
    , 51
    (2007). Moreover, the sentence was within the properly calculated guideline
    range and is presumed to be reasonable. See United States v. Alonzo, 
    435 F.3d 551
    , 554 (5th Cir. 2006).   Gammon’s argument that we should adopt his
    assessment of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors is contrary to the
    deferential appellate review dictated by Gall and does not rebut the
    presumption of reasonableness. See 
    Gall, 552 U.S. at 51
    ; United States v. Ruiz,
    
    621 F.3d 390
    , 398 (5th Cir. 2010).
    The judgment is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-50156

Citation Numbers: 670 F. App'x 880

Filed Date: 11/28/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023