United States v. Ngoc Nguyen , 361 F. App'x 597 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 09-10403     Document: 00511007835          Page: 1    Date Filed: 01/19/2010
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT  United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    January 19, 2010
    No. 09-10403
    Summary Calendar                    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    NGOC HONG NGUYEN,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 4:08-CR-119-18
    Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Ngoc Hong Nguyen appeals the 151-month sentence that he received after
    he pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with intent to distribute
    Methylenedioxymethamphetamine, also known as ecstacy. The district court
    sentenced Nguyen based on a finding that Nguyen was involved with 101,080
    ecstacy tablets. Nguyen does not challenge the district court’s finding on the
    first 50,000 tablets. The crux of Nguyen’s argument is that the district court
    clearly erred in relying on DEA Special Agent West’s testimony about Nguyen’s
    *
    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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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.
    Case: 09-10403    Document: 00511007835 Page: 2        Date Filed: 01/19/2010
    No. 09-10403
    involvement with 51,080 tablets. According to Nguyen, Agent West’s testimony
    was unreliable because it was based on wiretapped conversations in which
    Nguyen was identified only by Jimmy Nguyen, and Jimmy lacked credibility.
    This court reviews the district court’s determination of drug quantity for
    clear error, meaning that the court will affirm the finding as long as it is
    “plausible in light of the record as a whole.” United States v. Betancourt, 
    422 F.3d 240
    , 246 (5th Cir. 2005) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
    To determine drug quantity, the district court may consider “any information
    that has sufficient indicia of reliability to support its probable accuracy,
    including a probation officer’s testimony, a policeman’s approximation of
    unrecovered drugs, and even hearsay.” 
    Id. at 247
    . “Ultimately, the district court
    need only determine its factual findings at sentencing by a preponderance of the
    relevant and sufficiently reliable evidence.” 
    Id.
     Nguyen bears the burden of
    demonstrating that Agent West’s testimony about Nguyen’s involvement with
    51,080 ecstacy tablets is materially untrue, inaccurate, or unreliable. See United
    States v. Ramirez, 
    367 F.3d 274
    , 277 (5th Cir. 2004).
    Agent West did not reference Jimmy when he testified about the
    wiretapped conversations. Instead, his testimony was that the DEA conducted
    a wiretap on Nguyen’s telephone and recorded conversations in which Nguyen
    discussed ecstacy with “other co-conspirators” in California in September 2008.
    In those conversations, Nguyen discussed three different deals totaling 51,080
    ecstacy tablets. Nguyen points to nothing that renders Agent West’s testimony
    about the recorded conversations unreliable. Moreover, Nguyen’s argument that
    Agent West’s testimony is unreliable because the deals discussed in the recorded
    conversations did not come to fruition is specious because Nguyen pleaded guilty
    to conspiracy, which does not require completed transactions. See United States
    v. Patino-Prado, 
    533 F.3d 304
    , 309 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 
    129 S. Ct. 328
     (2008).
    Because the record supports the district court’s finding that Nguyen conspired
    2
    Case: 09-10403    Document: 00511007835 Page: 3         Date Filed: 01/19/2010
    No. 09-10403
    to possess with intent to distribute 101,080 ecstacy tablets, its calculation of the
    drug quantity was not clearly erroneous. See Betancourt, 
    422 F.3d at 246
    .
    AFFIRMED.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-10403

Citation Numbers: 361 F. App'x 597

Judges: Clement, Garza, Owen, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 1/20/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/2/2023