United States of America v. Charles Lucious

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CHARLES LUCIOUS,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10584
D.C. No. 2:09-cr-00224-RLH
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Roger L. Hunt, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: HAWKINS, SILVERMAN, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Charles Lucious appeals from the 60-month sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 922(g). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
FILED
OCT 4 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-10584 2
Lucious contends that his below-Guidelines sentence was substantively
unreasonable because the district court determined that he was not harmed by his
indictment being delayed. In light of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors
and the totality of the circumstances, including the 10-month downward variance
Lucious was granted for his rehabilitative efforts during the indictment delay
period, Lucious’s criminal history, and the new crimes Lucious committed during
the indictment delay period, Lucious’s below-Guidelines sentence is not
substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --