USA v. Sergio Contrera


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [14-10585 Affirmed ] Judge: ECP , Judge: PRO , Judge: JEG Mandate pull date is 04/03/2015 for Appellant Sergio Contreras [14-10585]

Download PDF
Case: 14-10585 Document: 00512968406 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/13/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-10585 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED March 13, 2015 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. SERGIO CONTRERAS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:13-CR-266-1 Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Sergio Contreras appeals the 60-month sentence imposed for his conviction for possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine. He contends that the district court erred in denying him a safety-valve reduction. We review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. United States v. Miller, 179 F.3d 961, 963-64 (5th Cir. 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 14-10585 Document: 00512968406 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/13/2015 No. 14-10585 1999). We need not decide whether to apply plain error review because Contreras’s claim of error fails even under the ordinary standard of review. A defendant may receive a two-level reduction in his offense level if he, inter alia, provides truthful information to the Government concerning the offense of conviction. See U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(16) (2013), 5C1.2(a)(5); 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5). Contrary to Contreras’s argument, Miller does not preclude us from concluding that Contreras’s untruthfulness about the source of cocaine in the instant offense independently justify the denial of the safetyvalve reduction so long as there is evidence that Contreras lied. See Miller, 179 F.3d at 967-69. The district court’s finding that Contreras was not truthful was plausible in light of the record as a whole and not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Montes, 602 F.3d 381, 384 (5th Cir. 2010). 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?