United States v. Guzman , 225 F. App'x 244 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                                                         United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT                  April 17, 2007
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 06-20339
    Conference Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    TOMAS BARRIOS GUZMAN, also known as Tigre,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Southern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:05-CR-433-ALL
    --------------------
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Tomas Barrios Guzman appeals the sentence he received
    following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiring to transport
    illegal aliens for commercial advantage and private financial
    gain.    He asserts that the district court erred in failing to
    give him a three-level reduction for acceptance of
    responsibility, in light of his timely admission of the elements
    of the offense and his apologies for his conduct.
    We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties
    and conclude that the district court did not clearly err 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    this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-20339
    -2-
    denying the reduction.    See United States v. Angeles-Mendoza,
    
    407 F.3d 742
    , 753 (5th Cir. 2005).   “The entry of a guilty plea
    does not entitle a defendant to a reduction as a matter of
    right.”    United States v. Flucas, 
    99 F.3d 177
    , 180 (5th Cir.
    1996).    Guzman’s statements at sentencing did not show “sincere
    contrition on [his] behalf” for the wrongness of his conduct.
    United States v. Nguyen, 
    190 F.3d 656
    , 658 (5th Cir. 1999)
    (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).   Because Guzman
    has not shown clear error, we need not address the Government’s
    contention that our review should be limited to the plain error
    standard.
    The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-20339

Citation Numbers: 225 F. App'x 244

Judges: Benavides, Higginbotham, Per Curiam, Prado

Filed Date: 4/17/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023