United States v. Johnson

¶1 Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Tom Curtis Johnson, III, preserves for further review his contention that his sentence is unreasonable because this court’s post-Booker" … rulings have effectively reinstated the mandatory Sentencing Guideline regime condemned in Booker. Johnson concedes that his argument is foreclosed by United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 546 U.S. 828, 126 S.Ct. 43, 163 L.Ed.2d 76 (2005), and its progeny, which have outlined this court’s methodology for reviewing sentences for reasonableness. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.