IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED December 15, 2009 No. 09-50184 Conference Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JOHN ERIC GILLIAM, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 7:07-CR-193-1

Before KING, JOLLY, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:* John Eric Gilliam appeals the sentence imposed following his jury conviction for possession and receipt of child pornography. He argues that his within-guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable because when considering the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the district court did not give appropriate weight to his medical condition, his vocational and criminal histories, and his conduct while awaiting trial and sentencing.

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .

R. 47.5.4.

No. 09-50184 Gilliam’s within-guidelines sentence is afforded a presumption of reasonableness. See Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 347 (2007). Gilliam’s appellate arguments amount to a disagreement with the district court’s weighing of the § 3553(a) factors and the appropriateness of his within-guidelines sentence. “[T]he sentencing judge is in a superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos-Maldonado, 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 328 (2008). As such, Gilliam has not shown that his sentence was substantively unreasonable, see United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751-53 (5th Cir. 2009), nor has he rebutted the presumption of reasonableness that attaches to his within-guidelines sentence. See Rita, 551 U.S. at 347.

AFFIRMED.