Opinion
No. 07-50209 Summary Calendar.
October 26, 2007.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney's Office Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Stanley G. Schneider, Schneider McKinney, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, USDC No. 6:06-CR-122-ALL.
Before KING, DAVIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
Michael Scott Graham appeals the 78-month prison sentence imposed following his conviction for possessing child pornography that had been shipped and transported in interstate commerce, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(5) and 2256(8)(A). Graham challenges the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to a properly calculated, within-guidelines sentence. This argument, however, is foreclosed; Graham's sentence is entitled to a presumption of reasonableness. See Rita v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007); United States v. Alonzo, 435 F.3d 551, 553 (5th Cir. 2006); United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). Although a defendant can rebut the reasonableness of his properly-calculated guidelines sentence, Graham has failed to do so. See United States v. Nikonova, 480 F.3d 371, 376 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (May 21, 2007) (06-11834).
Graham also argues that the district court erred by failing to provide specific reasons for rejecting his arguments in support of a more lenient sentence. However, little explanation is required when the district court exercises its discretion to impose a sentence within a properly calculated guidelines range. Mares, 402 F.3d at 519. Moreover, Graham's contention that the district court was required to articulate specific reasons for rejecting his arguments is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness afforded his sentence. See Nikonova, 480 F.3d 371, 376. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.