United States v. Taylor , 427 F. App'x 273 ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4749
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
CORNELL ISAAC TAYLOR, a/k/a Yum,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cr-00477-WO-1)
Submitted: April 12, 2011 Decided: May 4, 2011
Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Carlyle Sherrill, III, SHERRILL & CAMERON, PLLC, Salisbury,
North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley E. Rand, United States
Attorney, Randall S. Galyon, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Cornell Isaac Taylor pleaded guilty to possession with
intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)
(2006). The district court sentenced Taylor to the statutory
mandatory minimum term of 120 months of imprisonment, and he now
appeals. Finding no error, we affirm.
On appeal, Taylor argues that the district court erred
in determining that he was ineligible for application of the
safety valve provision under the Sentencing Guidelines. In
reviewing the district court’s calculations under the
Guidelines, “we review the district court’s legal conclusions de
novo and its factual findings for clear error.” United
States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 626 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal
quotation marks and citation omitted). We will “find clear
error only if, on the entire evidence, [we are] left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
Id. at 631 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
To qualify for the safety valve provision and a
sentence below the statutorily required mandatory minimum, the
defendant must establish that: (1) he does not have more than
one criminal history point; (2) he did not use violence or
possess a firearm in connection with the offense; (3) the
offense did not result in death or serious bodily injury; (4) he
was not an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of others
2
in the offense; and (5) no later than the time of sentencing, he
truthfully provided the government with all evidence and
information he had concerning the offense or offenses that were
part of the same course of conduct or of a common scheme or
plan. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) (2006); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual § 5C1.2 (2010). The defendant bears the burden of
proving that all five safety valve requirements have been met.
United States v. Beltran-Ortiz, 91 F.3d 665, 669 (4th Cir.
1996).
Moreover, the requirement that the defendant
truthfully provide all information concerning the offense to the
government “obligates defendants to demonstrate, through
affirmative conduct, that they have supplied truthful
information to the Government.” United States v. Ivester, 75
F.3d 182, 185 (4th Cir. 1996) (concluding that defendant must
come forward with truthful information regardless of whether
government seeks to debrief defendant). The district court
determined that Taylor had failed to provide truthful
information to the Government regarding the offense. Having
reviewed the record, we conclude that this finding was not
clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
3
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
4