United States v. Wilson

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
SEP 02, 2011
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 10-15147
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 4:10-cr-00025-RH-WCS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALDO RAY WILSON,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Florida
________________________
(September 2, 2011)
Before EDMONDSON, PRYOR and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Aldo Ray Wilson appeals his sentence of 235 months of imprisonment for
possessing a firearm and ammunition as a convicted felon. 18 U.S.C. §§
Case: 10-15147 Date Filed: 09/02/2011 Page: 1 of 3

-- 1 of 3 --

922(g)(1); 924(e). Wilson argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable.
We affirm Wilson’s sentence, but we remand for the limited purpose of correcting
an error in the written judgment.
Wilson’s sentence is procedurally reasonable. Wilson argues that the
written judgment, which states that “a lesser sentence is not statutorily
authorized,” creates substantial doubt that the district court understood that it had
the authority to impose a more lenient sentence, but this excerpt from the written
judgment amounts to no more than a scrivener’s error. The district court
explained during the sentencing hearing that it had given “substantial
consideration whether [a statutory minimum sentence of] 180 months would be
adequate.” The district court considered the statutory factors and explained that,
based on Wilson’s extensive criminal history that included convictions for felony
battery and aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, a sentence at the low end of
the guideline range would best protect the public and effectuate the intent of
Congress in prohibiting convicts from possessing weapons. See Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). The district court clearly
understood that it could vary below the low end of the guideline range. Although
we affirm Wilson’s sentence, we remand for the district court to delete from its
written judgment the statement that Wilson could not receive a lesser sentence.
2
Case: 10-15147 Date Filed: 09/02/2011 Page: 2 of 3

-- 2 of 3 --

See United States v. Bonilla, 579 F.3d 1233, 1245 (11th Cir. 2009).
We AFFIRM Wilson’s sentence, and we REMAND for the district court to
correct the error in its written judgment.
3
Case: 10-15147 Date Filed: 09/02/2011 Page: 3 of 3

-- 3 of 3 --