
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. John B. CORLEY, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-30281
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Oct. 23, 2006.
    Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Mary J. Mudrick, U.S. Attorney’s Office Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Betty Lee Marak, Federal Public Defender’s Office Western District of Louisiana, Shreveport, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before GARWOOD, CLEMENT and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

John B. Corley appeals the sentence imposed following his post-Booker conviction of theft of firearms that were transported in interstate commerce, transporting stolen firearms in interstate commerce, possession of stolen firearms that were transported in interstate commerce, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. Corley argues for the first time on appeal that the non-Guidelines sentence imposed by the district court was unreasonable because the district court based its decision on general dissatisfaction with the Guidelines. He also argues that the Guidelines adequately accounted for his criminal behavior.

The record indicates that the district court correctly calculated the Guidelines range and used the Guidelines as a frame of reference. See United States v. Smith, 440 F.3d 704, 707 (5th Cir.2006). The district court, troubled by Corley’s extensive criminal history (29 criminal history points) and the facts of his offenses, articulated reasons that were consistent with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) for imposing a non-Guidelines sentence. See id. Moreover, given the seriousness of Corley’s criminal history and offense conduct as found by the district court, the extent of the deviation was not unreasonable. See United States v. Smith, 417 F.3d 483, 491-93 and n. 40-42 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 713, 163 L.Ed.2d 543 (2005).

Corley fails to meet his burden of showing that the district court’s non-Guidelines sentence, which was imposed after United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), was error, plain or otherwise. See United States v. Jones, 444 F.3d 430, 434-36 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2958, 165 L.Ed.2d 970 (2006).

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5 the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     
      
       It does not reflect any general dissatisfaction with the offense Guidelines.
     