United States v. Jose Lara, Jr. ( 2000 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 99-3136
    ___________
    United States of America,                *
    *
    Appellee,                   *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                                 * District Court for the
    * District of Nebraska.
    Jose Lara, Jr.,                          *
    *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Appellant.                  *
    ___________
    Submitted: March 6, 2000
    Filed: March 13, 2000
    ___________
    Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, BOWMAN, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Jose Lara, Jr. pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent
    to distribute methamphetamine and cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (1994).
    The District Court1 sentenced him to 188 months imprisonment and five years
    supervised release. On appeal, Lara challenges the Court’s application of a two-level
    enhancement for possessing a firearm in connection with the offense, the Court’s
    application of a three-level enhancement for being a manager or supervisor of the
    1
    The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, United States District Judge for the District
    of Nebraska.
    criminal activity, the Court’s denial of Lara’s motion for a downward departure, and
    the reliability of the evidence presented at sentencing.
    We conclude that the District Court did not clearly err in determining Lara’s role
    in the offense, see United States v. Johnson, 
    47 F.3d 272
    , 277 (8th Cir. 1995) (standard
    of review), or in determining that he possessed a firearm in connection with the offense,
    see United States v. Belitz, 
    141 F.3d 815
    , 817 (8th Cir. 1998) (standard of review), and
    did not abuse its discretion in determining the reliability of the evidence presented at
    sentencing, see United States v. Stavig, 
    80 F.3d 1241
    , 1247 (8th Cir. 1996) (standard
    of review). As the Court was aware of its authority to grant a downward departure, and
    discretionarily declined to do so, the issue is unreviewable on appeal. See United
    States v. Turechek, 
    138 F.3d 1226
    , 1228 (8th Cir. 1998).
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the District Court.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-