United States v. Ramos ( 2002 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41211
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ROBERT RAMOS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. M-01-CR-265-3
--------------------
May 29, 2002
Before DAVIS, BENAVIDES, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Robert Ramos appeals his sentence following his guilty-plea
conviction for conspiracy to possess more than 100 kilograms of
marijuana with intent to distribute. Ramos argues that the
district court erred in assessing a two-point sentencing
enhancement for possession of a firearm during the commission of
the convicted offense.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-41211
-2-
The district court’s decision to enhance Ramos’ offense
level for possession of a firearm under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) is
a factual determination that this court reviews for clear error.
See United States v. Broussard, 80 F.3d 1025, 1041 (5th Cir.
1996). “Possession of a firearm will enhance a defendant’s
sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) where a temporal and
spatial relationship exists between the weapon, the
drug-trafficking activity, and the defendant.” United States v.
Marmolejo, 105 F.3d 1213, 1216 (5th Cir. 1997). A black pickup
truck containing a loaded handgun was parked in close proximity
to a large quantity of marijuana at the scene of Ramos’ arrest.
Ramos admitted that he had previously driven this vehicle, in
which a small quantity of marijuana and a map tracing a route
designed to avoid immigration inspection stations were also
found. There was also evidence, contained in Ramos’ presentence
report, that Ramos was the driver of black pickup truck. The
Government thus established the requisite temporal and spatial
relationship, and Ramos failed to establish that it was “clearly
improbable” that the gun was connected with the offense. See
United States v. Cooper, 274 F.3d 230, 246 n.8 (5th Cir. 2001).
For the foregoing reasons, Ramos’ sentence is AFFIRMED.