United States v. Anderson
── United States v. Anderson ──
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Date: June 01, 2026
Category: Direct Criminal
Case: 26-10006 Document: 63-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/01/2026
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 26-10006
Summary Calendar FILED
____________ June 1, 2026
Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America, Clerk
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Kenneth Cody Anderson,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:25-CR-39-1
______________________________
Before Richman, Southwick, and Willett, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Kenneth Cody Anderson appeals the 180-month, within-guidelines
sentence, imposed following his guilty plea conviction for possession with the
intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)
and (b)(1)(B)(viii). He argues his sentence is substantively unreasonable,
asserting that the district court should have varied below the guidelines range
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 26-10006 Document: 63-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/01/2026
No. 26-10006
based on the disparate treatment between actual methamphetamine (for
which he was charged) and a mixture containing methamphetamine.
The district court considered and rejected Anderson’s request for a
lesser sentence, and Anderson has not shown that his sentence fails to
account for a factor that should have received significant weight, gave
significant weight to an improper factor, or represents a clear error of
judgment in balancing the sentencing factors. See United States v. Cooks, 589
F.3d 173, 186 (5th Cir. 2009). Anderson’s disagreement with the propriety
of the sentence is insufficient to rebut the presumption of reasonableness that
applies to his within-guidelines sentence. See id.; see also United States v.
Malone, 828 F.3d 331, 339 (5th Cir. 2016).
AFFIRMED.
2
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}