USA v. Cameron Hollie

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [12-10567 Affirmed ] Judge: JLW , Judge: JWE , Judge: JEG Mandate pull date is 04/16/2013 for Appellant Cameron Charles Hollie [12-10567]

Case: 12-10567

Document: 00512187388

Page: 1

Date Filed: 03/26/2013

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Fifth Circuit

FILED
No. 12-10567
Summary Calendar

March 26, 2013
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
CAMERON CHARLES HOLLIE,
Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:11-CR-196-9

Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Cameron Charles Hollie appeals the 36-month sentence imposed by the
district court following his conviction for making, possessing, and uttering a
forged and counterfeit security. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 513(a). Hollie’s sentence is
18 months above the top of the advisory range of imprisonment under the
Sentencing Guidelines of 12 to 18 months. At sentencing, the district court
characterized the sentence both as an upward departure pursuant to the

*

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 12-10567

Document: 00512187388

Page: 2

Date Filed: 03/26/2013

No. 12-10567
Guidelines and as a variance in the light of the factors outlined in 18 U.S.C.
§ 3553(a).
Hollie challenges the district court’s refusal to award him credit for
acceptance of responsibility pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 on the ground that he
was engaged in criminal conduct while on pretrial release, arguing that there
was no factual basis to support the allegations that he was a drug trafficker or
involved in drug sales while on pretrial release. At sentencing, Hollie withdrew
the objection to the factual basis for the information contained in the addendum
to the presentence report reflecting that he had engaged in criminal conduct
while on pretrial release. Hollie’s withdrawal of his objection amounted to a
waiver thereof and renders the objection unreviewable on appeal. See United
States v. Musquiz, 45 F.3d 927, 931 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Conn, 657
F.3d 280, 286 (5th Cir. 2011). Hollie has made no showing that the district court
clearly erred in declining to award him credit for acceptance of responsibility on
the ground that he engaged in criminal conduct while on pretrial release. See
United States v. Rickett, 89 F.3d 224, 227 (5th Cir. 1996); United States v.
Outlaw, 319 F.3d 701, 705 (5th Cir. 2003).
Although Hollie challenges the district court’s imposition of an upward
departure under the Guidelines, Hollie raises no argument challenging the
district court’s alternate basis for imposing the sentence as an upward variance
pursuant to the § 3553(a) factors, and thus has abandoned that issue. See
United States v. Scroggins, 599 F.3d 433, 446-47 (5th Cir. 2010). Even if the
issue were not deemed abandoned, the record reflects that the district court
properly considered the § 3553(a) factors at sentencing and that the sentence
imposed “was reasonable under the totality of the relevant statutory factors.”
United States v. Brantley, 537 F.3d 347, 349 (5th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation
marks and citation omitted). This court need not address Hollie’s argument that
an upward departure pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3 was not appropriate because
the sentence may be affirmed on the district court’s alternate basis for the
2

Case: 12-10567

Document: 00512187388

Page: 3

Date Filed: 03/26/2013

No. 12-10567
sentence as an upward variance warranted by § 3553(a). See United States v.
Bonilla, 524 F.3d 647, 656-59 (5th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

3