
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Javier SANCHEZ-PEREZ, also known as Javier Perez Sanchez, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 15-10718
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    May 17, 2016.
    James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Kevin Joel Page, Jerry Van Beard, Esq., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Dallas, TX, Michael Arthur Lehmann, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Fort Worth, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Javier Sanchez-Perez was convicted of illegal reentry into the United States following deportation. The district courted imposed an above-Guidelines sentence of 110 months in prison and three years of supervised release. Sanchez-Perez appeals, arguing that his sentence is substantively unreasonable. Specifically, Sanchez-Perez contends that the district court exaggerated the seriousness of his prior conviction for possession of marijuana by-stating that he was sentenced to six years in prison when, in fact, he was only sentenced to six months in prison. Sanchez-Perez further claims the district court failed to consider that he grew up in the United States and that he fled back to the United States after his prior deportation to Mexico because his' life was threatened by drug traffickers.

We review the district court’s non-Guidelines sentence for abuse of discretion under the totality of the circumstances. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Gerezano-Rosales, 692 F.3d 393, 400 (5th Cir.2012). As to Sanchez-Perez’s sentence for his prior possession of marijuana conviction, the district court corrected itself after it mistakenly stated that Sanchez-Perez was sentenced to six years in prison, and its initial misstatement did not affect the sentence. And as to the district court’s weighing of the sentencing factors and the facts of the case, the court determined that an upward variance from-the Guidelines was appropriate to address Sanchez Perez’s substantial and underrepresented criminal history and his repeated illegal reentries following pri- or deportations. Under the totality of the circumstances, the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing this sentence.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       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.
     
      
      . In his brief on appeal, Sanchez-Perez also makes a bare assertion that the record did not support the district court’s finding that he had previously committed an assault, but he does not provide any basis in law or fact for this contention. This claim is therefore abandoned. See, e.g., United States v. Thompson, 735 F.3d 291, 298 n. 17 (5th Cir.2013) (deeming insufficiently briefed issue abandoned).
     