United States v. Andrade-Guerrero ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 01-20639
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    LUIS GUSTAVO ANDRADE-GUERRERO,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. H-01-CR-146-1
    --------------------
    January 9, 2002
    Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY and DEMOSS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Luis Gustavo Andrade-Guerrero (“Andrade”) appeals his
    sentence following his conviction for possession with intent to
    distribute heroin.   Andrade argues that the district court erred
    in denying him an offense level reduction for his role in the
    offense pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2.
    We review for clear error the sentencing court’s
    determination that a defendant did not play a minor role in an
    offense.   United States v. Zuniga, 
    18 F.3d 1254
    , 1261 (5th Cir.
    1994).   The Sentencing Guidelines allow a minor participant in
    *
    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    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
    No. 01-20639
    -2-
    any criminal activity a two-level reduction in his base offense
    level.   U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b).   A “minor participant” is defined as
    one who is “less culpable than most other participants, but whose
    role could not be described as minimal.”   U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2,
    comment. (n.3).   The defendant bears the burden of proving that
    he was a minor participant in the offense.     United States v.
    Marmolejo, 
    106 F.3d 1213
    , 1217 (5th Cir. 1997).
    Andrade was not charged with conspiracy; he was charged with
    possession with intent to distribute heroin.    His sentence was
    calculated based on the quantity of heroin he personally
    transported.   The district court’s finding that Andrade was not a
    minor participant is not clearly erroneous.     Marmolejo, 
    106 F.3d at 1217
    ; see United States v. Flucas, 
    99 F.3d 177
    , 180-81 (5th
    Cir. 1996).
    Based on the foregoing, the district court’s judgment is
    AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-20639

Filed Date: 1/11/2002

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/21/2014