USA v. Ashton Shelton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-31165 Affirmed] Judge: EGJ, Judge: PRO, Judge: CH. Mandate pull date is 08/23/2017 for Appellant Ashton Bernard Shelton [16-31165]

Case: 16-31165

Document: 00514099970

Page: 1

Date Filed: 08/02/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-31165
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

FILED
August 2, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff–Appellee,
v.
ASHTON BERNARD SHELTON, also known as A-1,
Defendant–Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 5:16-CR-57-6
Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

Ashton Bernard Shelton challenges the sentence imposed following his
guilty-plea conviction of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to
distribute cocaine and crack cocaine. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Shelton
argues that the district court erred in denying him a minor role adjustment to
his offense level and in determining the quantity of narcotics attributable to
him. We review the district court’s sentencing decision for abuse of discretion.

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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: 16-31165

Document: 00514099970

Page: 2

Date Filed: 08/02/2017

No. 16-31165
United States v. Goncalves, 613 F.3d 601, 604 (5th Cir. 2010). Because Shelton
preserved the issues he raises on appeal, we review the district court’s
application of the Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error.
Id. at 604-05.
Section 3B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines provides for a two-level
reduction to a defendant’s offense level where the defendant “is less culpable
than most other participants in the criminal activity, but whose role could not
be described as minimal.” § 3B1.2, comment (n.5). Shelton has the burden of
proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a § 3B1.2 adjustment is
warranted. See United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 2016).
The evidence adduced at sentencing and in the PSR shows that Shelton
was in frequent contact with his co-conspirators regarding narcotics supply
and deals, that he repeatedly used the same connections within the conspiracy
to obtain drugs, that he actively engaged in setting up drug deals, and that he
participated

generally

in

the

distribution

network.

See

§

3B1.2,

comment (n.3(C)). The district court’s decision not to apply the minor role
adjustment is plausible in light of these facts. See Goncalves, 613 F.3d at 60405.
Likewise, as to the drug weight attributed to Shelton, the evidence
reveals that Shelton joined and remained in the conspiracy for a number of
months prior to his arrest, that he dealt with a variety of narcotics and
quantities of those narcotics, and that he was in frequent contact with his coconspirators regarding all aspects of the drug transactions. See United States
v. Turner, 319 F.3d 716, 724 (5th Cir. 2003); U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B). As well,
the evidence shows that the overall conspiracy involved at least 108 grams of
crack cocaine, and that, in the course of the conspiracy, Shelton was actively
involved with the sale of 15.23 grams of crack cocaine in one sale as well as

2

Case: 16-31165

Document: 00514099970

Page: 3

Date Filed: 08/02/2017

No. 16-31165
smaller amounts of crack cocaine in several other sales. See § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B).
The district court’s attribution of at least 28 grams but less than 112 grams of
crack cocaine is plausible in light of that record. See Goncalves, 613 F.3d at
604-05.
The decision of the district court is AFFIRMED.

3