United States v. Perez , 101 F. App'x 907 ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-4111
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DARIO DEJESUS PEREZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CR-98-65)
Submitted: June 24, 2004 Decided: June 30, 2004
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron E. Michel, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Robert J. Conrad, Jr., United States Attorney, C. Nicks Williams,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Dario DeJesus Perez pled guilty to conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine and cocaine base
(crack), 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000) (Count One), and conspiracy to
commit money laundering, 18 U.S.C.A. § 1956(h) (West Supp. 2004).
He received a sentence of 135 months imprisonment. Perez appeals
his sentence,* arguing that the district court plainly erred in
permitting his attorney to withdraw his objections to the
presentence report. We affirm.
Perez initially objected to the 150 kilograms of cocaine
attributed to him as relevant conduct in the presentence report and
to the lack of a minor role adjustment. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual §§ 2D1.1(c)(1), 3B1.2 (1998). At the sentencing hearing, he
withdrew his objections and stipulated to the drug amount and role
attributed to him. The government in turn withdrew its objection
to the application of the safety valve provision. USSG
§ 2D1.1(b)(6). The district court then adopted the presentence
report.
On appeal, Perez contends that the district court plainly
erred in failing to establish the facts underlying the stipulation.
Because no issue was disputed, the district court was free to adopt
*
After Perez filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000), the
district court vacated and reinstated the judgment to permit him a
timely appeal. See United States v. Peak, 992 F.2d 39, 42 (4th
Cir. 1993).
- 2 -
the recommended findings in the presentence report without further
inquiry, United States v. Terry, 916 F.2d 157, 162 (4th Cir. 1990),
and did not err in doing so. United States v. Williams, 29 F.3d
172, 174-75 (4th Cir. 1994) (stipulation resolved drug amount
issue). Moreover, the government explained that its information
concerning Perez’s involvement in the conspiracy arose from
wiretapped conversations of other conspirators. Some of the
conversations were with Perez and some were about him. The
government also relied on statements later provided by certain
conspirators. Perez did not challenge the accuracy or reliability
of the government’s information.
We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district
court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -