Defendant-Appellant Motilall Sudeen appeals his 120-month term of imprison- *370 merit that was imposed following his convictions for conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States, wire fraud, travel fraud, and money laundering. Sudeen contends that the district court reversibly erred by imposing a guidelines sentence without independently determining that the sentencing range was reasonable and without considering all of the sentencing factors listed in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

The record reflects that the district court implicitly considered the statutory sentencing factors. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005); United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir. 2006). Sudeen has not shown that the sentence was unreasonable or that we should not defer to the district court’s determinations at sentencing. See Mares, 402 F.3d at 519.

AFFIRMED.