United States v. Tracy Aubert , 433 F. App'x 291 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 10-30883     Document: 00511547687         Page: 1     Date Filed: 07/21/2011
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    July 21, 2011
    No. 10-30883
    Summary Calendar                        Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    TRACY AUBERT,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 2:03-CR-60-1
    Before JOLLY, GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Tracy Aubert appeals as substantively unreasonable the sentence imposed
    upon the revocation of supervised release. Aubert’s supervised release was
    revoked after he failed to complete a drug treatment program. The district court
    upwardly varied from the advisory range guideline range of four to ten months
    and imposed a statutory maximum sentence of 36 months of imprisonment.
    Aubert contends that his expulsion from the drug treatment program was
    due in part to the probation officer’s refusal to approve a request for additional
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 10-30883      Document: 00511547687   Page: 2   Date Filed: 07/21/2011
    No. 10-30883
    treatment sessions.      He argues that a statutory maximum sentence was
    unreasonable given that he was only partially to blame for his failure to succeed
    in the program. Aubert also contends that his sentence is unconstitutional, and
    hence substantively unreasonable, because he was punished on account of his
    addiction to drugs.
    In imposing sentence, the district court took note of Aubert’s criminal
    offenses during his term of supervision, the nature and frequency of supervised
    release violations, and Aubert’s continued need for drug treatment and
    education or vocational training. The district court indicated that in light of
    Aubert’s failure to complete a drug rehabilitation program during his supervised
    release he would benefit from a longer and more intensive drug treatment
    program in a prison setting. Aubert has not shown that the district court’s
    sentence was plainly unreasonable. See United States v. Miller, 
    634 F.3d 841
    ,
    843 (5th Cir. 2011).
    AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-30883

Citation Numbers: 433 F. App'x 291

Judges: Garza, Jolly, Per Curiam, Stewart

Filed Date: 7/21/2011

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023