USA v. Luis Reyes-Cuellar
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [12-40073 Affirmed ] Judge: EGJ , Judge: FPB , Judge: JLD Mandate pull date is 11/08/2012 for Appellant Luis Orlando Reyes-Cuellar [12-40073]
Date Filed: 10/18/2012
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
October 18, 2012
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
LUIS ORLANDO REYES-CUELLAR,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:11-CR-1003-2
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
Luis Orlando Reyes-Cuellar appeals the 108-month sentence imposed
following his guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. Reyes-Cuellar argues that the
district court clearly erred in applying a two-level adjustment for possession of
a dangerous weapon. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1). He contends that there was
insufficient evidence to show that the firearms recovered from the stash house
were possessed in connection with the offense or that he should have reasonably
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
Date Filed: 10/18/2012
foreseen that a dangerous weapon would be possessed. Reyes-Cuellar further
contends that the district court failed to make proper findings to support the
application of the enhancement.
This court generally reviews a district court’s interpretation or application
of the Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States
v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). “There is no clear error
if the district court’s finding is plausible in light of the record as a whole.” Id.
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Section 2D1.1 should be applied “if the weapon was present, unless it is
clearly improbable that the weapon was connected with the offense.” § 2D1.1,
A defendant may be held responsible for “all reasonably
foreseeable acts” of others taken “in furtherance of . . . jointly under criminal
activity.” U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B); see also United States v. Mergerson, 4 F.3d
337, 350 (5th Cir. 1993). There is ample evidence that Reyes-Cuellar and his
coconspirator were jointly engaged in the crime of possession with intent to
distribute a large amount of cocaine. It was thus reasonably foreseeable that the
coconspirator would possess a dangerous weapon at a stash house known to be
“utilized to store large quantities of narcotics.” See United States v. Thomas, 120
F.3d 564, 574 (5th Cir. 1997); Mergerson, 4 F.3d at 350. The record reflects that
the district court considered the arguments presented by Reyes-Cuellar and
adopted the presentence report’s facts regarding the dangerous weapon
enhancement. See United States v. Rodriguez, 602 F.3d 346, 363 (5th Cir. 2010);
United States v. Huerta, 182 F.3d 361, 364 (5th Cir. 1999). Reyes-Cuellar has
failed to show that the district court clearly erred in applying the firearm
enhancement to his sentence. See Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d at 764. The
judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?