USA v. Mateo Castillo-Ruela


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-50011 Affirmed ] Judge: PEH , Judge: JLD , Judge: JEG Mandate pull date is 03/28/2014 for Appellant Mateo Castillo-Ruelas [13-50011]

Download PDF
Case: 13-50011 Document: 00512553578 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 13-50011 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 7, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. MATEO CASTILLO-RUELAS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:10-CR-779-4 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mateo Castillo-Ruelas appeals the total 324-month sentence imposed after a jury convicted him of conspiracy to possess with the intent to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, illegal reentry after having previously been deported, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Castillo-Ruelas argues that the district court erred in calculating the drug quantity and in imposing an enhancement for obstruction of justice. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 13-50011 Document: 00512553578 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/07/2014 No. 13-50011 The district court’s calculation of the quantity of drugs involved in an offense is a factual determination that we review for clear error. United States v. Betancourt, 422 F.3d 240, 246 (5th Cir. 2005). Castillo-Ruelas’s mere opinion that his brother’s testimony was not credible is not sufficient to undermine the district court’s credibility determinations or rebut the reliability of the drug quantity information contained in the presentence report (PSR). See United States v. Montes, 602 F.3d 381, 384 (5th Cir. 2010); United States v. Ford, 558 F.3d 371, 376-77 (5th Cir. 2009); United States v. Alford, 142 F.3d 825, 832 (5th Cir. 1998). The district court’s determination that a defendant obstructed justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 is also a factual finding that we review for clear error. United States v. Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d 204, 208 (5th Cir. 2008). Castillo-Ruelas’s mere objection to the obstruction of justice enhancement, without more, does not suffice to rebut the truth, accuracy, or reliability of the supporting evidence contained in the PSR. See id. at 208; see also Ford, 558 F.3d at 376-77. The district court did not clearly err in calculating the drug quantity or in imposing an obstruction of justice enhancement. See Betancourt, 422 F.3d at 246; Juarez-Duarte, 513 F.3d at 208. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2

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?