Case: 17-10566 Document: 00514395719 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/21/2018

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-10566 FILED Summary Calendar March 21, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. VANESSA MAYO, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:10-CR-21-1

Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Vanessa Mayo appeals the above-guidelines sentence imposed for the third revocation of her supervised release. She argues only that the 30-month sentence is substantively unreasonable.

Given Mayo’s objection at sentencing, we review her substantive reasonableness challenge under the “plainly unreasonable” standard. See United States v. Miller, 634 F.3d 841, 843 (5th Cir. 2011). Mayo’s arguments,

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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

Case: 17-10566 Document: 00514395719 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/21/2018

No. 17-10566 however, essentially amount to a disagreement with the district court’s assessment of the sentencing factors, which this court will not reweigh. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Thus, Mayo has failed to show that the sentence is substantively unreasonable. See Miller, 634 F.3d at 843; United States v. Whitelaw, 580 F.3d 256, 260 (5th Cir. 2009); see, e.g., United States v. Kippers, 685 F.3d 491, 500-01 (5th Cir. 2012).

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.