
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Albert WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-11813
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Feb. 9, 2009.
    Howard J. Schumacher, Law Offices Of Howard J. Schumacher, FT Lauderdale, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Anne R. Schultz, Laura Thomas Rivero, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Lisa T. Rubio, Miami, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Before CARNES, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Albert Williams appeals his sentence of 240 months of imprisonment for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base. 21 U.S.C. § 846. Williams argues that his sentence is unreasonable. We affirm.

We review the reasonableness of a criminal sentence for an abuse of discretion. Gall v. United States, — U.S. -, 128 S.Ct. 586, 594, 596-97, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). “[T]he party who challenges the sentence bears the burden of establishing that the sentence is unreasonable in the light of both [the] record and the factors in section 3558(a).” United States v. Talley, 431 F.3d 784, 788 (11th Cir.2005). The weight allocated an individual factor in section 3553 “is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the district court.” United States v. Clay, 483 F.3d 739, 743 (11th Cir.2007).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing a sentence within the guideline range. Although Williams complains that the court failed to consider that he had assisted law enforcement and he had a history of substance abuse and various mental infirmities, the court stated that it had considered those facts. The court did not abuse its discretion when it concluded that a sentence of 240 months of imprisonment served the statutory purposes of deterrence and adequate punishment. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a); Gall, 128 S.Ct. at 597. Williams’s sentence is reasonable.

Williams’s sentence is AFFIRMED.  