USA v. Phillips, No. 23-30621 (5th Cir. 2024)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 23-30621 Document: 52-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/25/2024 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ____________ United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED No. 23-30621 Summary Calendar ____________ March 25, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, versus Tory Phillips, Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana USDC No. 6:20-CR-284-2 ______________________________ Before King, Haynes, and Graves, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Tory Phillips appeals the within-guidelines 88-month sentence of imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. Insofar as Phillips challenges the district court’s denial of his request for a downward departure, we lack jurisdiction to review this issue. See _____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 23-30621 Document: 52-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/25/2024 No. 23-30621 United States v. Fillmore, 889 F.3d 249, 255 (5th Cir. 2018). As to his claim that his sentence is substantively unreasonable, our review is for an abuse of discretion. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The district court considered and rejected Phillips’s arguments for a lesser sentence, and he has presented nothing to indicate that the court abused its discretion in weighing the sentencing factors. See United States v. Cooks, 589 F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). His disagreement with the propriety of the sentence is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that applies to his within-guidelines sentence. See id. Accordingly, we DISMISS Phillips’s appeal, in part, for lack of jurisdiction and AFFIRM the district court’s judgment in all other respects. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.