US v. Victor Barrett

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:11-cr-00042-IMK-2 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998851638].. [11-5056]

Appeal: 11-5056

Doc: 21

Filed: 05/10/2012

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-5056

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
VICTOR BARRETT,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.
Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge. (1:11-cr-00042-IMK-2)

Submitted:

April 23, 2012

Decided:

May 10, 2012

Before AGEE, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian J. Kornbrath, Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West
Virginia, for Appellant.
William J. Ihlenfeld, II, United
States Attorney, Andrew R. Cogar, Assistant United States
Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-5056

Doc: 21

Filed: 05/10/2012

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Victor

Barrett

appeals

his

sentence

after

pleading

guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(C), 846 (2006).

On appeal, he

contends

drug

that

the

district

court

erred

relevant conduct findings against him.

in

its

quantity

We affirm.

We review the district court’s drug quantity findings
for clear error.

United States v. Slade, 631 F.3d 185, 188 (4th

Cir.), cert. denied, 131 S. Ct. 2943 (2011).

We will reverse

these findings “only if we are left with the definite and firm
conviction that a mistake has been committed.”

United States v.

Jeffers, 570 F.3d 557, 570 (4th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted).

“Neither the Guidelines nor the

courts

calculations

have

required

precise

of

drug

quantity.”

United States v. Uwaeme, 975 F.2d 1016, 1019 (4th Cir. 1992);
see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2D1.1 cmt. n.12 (2010).
The district court “must only determine that it was more likely
than not that the defendant was responsible for at least the
drug quantity attributed to him.”

United States v. Kiulin, 360

F.3d 456, 461 (4th Cir. 2004).
We

have

reviewed

the

record

and

conclude

that

the

district court did not clearly err in finding that Barrett was
responsible for at least two kilograms of cocaine.
we affirm the district court’s judgment.
2

Accordingly,

We dispense with oral

Appeal: 11-5056

Doc: 21

Filed: 05/10/2012

Pg: 3 of 3

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3