BIRMINGHAM, Alabama - A federal appeals court says a judge didn't impose a tough enough sentence on a former Birmingham police officer who was convicted in 2012 of using excessive force on a handcuffed man.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit this week vacated the five-year probationary sentence and ordered the federal judge to re-sentence Corey L. Hooper, U.S. Attorney Joyce White Vance announced today.

Hooper's attorney, Everett Wess, said he is reviewing the appeal court's opinion. "Once completed, I will review sentencing options based on the opinion from the 11th Circuit," he stated in an email.

The 11th Circuit Court noted that the district court had given Hooper a five-year probationary sentence, despite federal sentencing guidelines that showed a sentence of 70 to 87 months as being appropriate and federal prosecutors' recommendation of more than seven years in prison for Hooper's conviction for deprivation of rights under color of law.

The court ruled that "Hooper's 60-month probationary sentence is substantively unreasonable under the totality of the circumstances. We therefore vacate and remand for further review and re-sentencing."

The court, however, did not dictate a specific sentence Hooper should receive.

A federal jury on Oct. 3, 2012 found Hooper guilty of using excessive force for hitting a handcuffed Martez Gulley multiple times in the face while Gulley was in the back of a patrol car. But Hooper was found not guilty of a second charge of using excessive force in the use of a stun gun against another man in a separate 2007 incident.

The U.S. Attorney's Office appealed U.S. District Court Judge Inge P. Johnson's probationary sentence as unreasonable, arguing that it did not satisfy the need for general deterrence of the crime of excessive use of force by police officers, according to Vance's statement.

The appeals court stated in its opinion that Johnson abused her discretion when it issued Hooper a five-year probationary sentence. The judge didn't adequately consider the need for Hooper's sentence to be a deterrent to other police officer from using excessive force, . Deterrence is one of the factors a judge considers in sentencing.

Johnson did not adequately consider the seriousness of Hooper's conviction and his abuse of police power and "the vulnerability of a restrained arrestee (Gulley)," according to the court's opinion.

The appeals court also found that Johnson failed to cite "a sufficiently significant justification for granting a 100 (percent), 70-month downward variance," from the recommended guidelines sentence.

"While sentencing courts should look to a defendant's history and characteristics, Hooper's clean criminal history and family ties cannot sufficiently justify such a steep variance under the facts of this case," the court ruled.

Gulley had won a $75,000 verdict in 2011 against Hooper in a civil lawsuit stemming from the incident. Hooper recently won a lawsuit filed against him by another man in an unrelated incident.