Filed: Sep. 03, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-40467 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PEDRO GARZA, JR., Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (M-97-CR-142-2) September 2, 1999 Before POLITZ, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Pedro Garza pleaded guilty to one count of alien transporting. Garza appeals his sentence, contending that the district court erred by increasing h
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 98-40467 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PEDRO GARZA, JR., Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (M-97-CR-142-2) September 2, 1999 Before POLITZ, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Pedro Garza pleaded guilty to one count of alien transporting. Garza appeals his sentence, contending that the district court erred by increasing hi..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-40467
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PEDRO GARZA, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(M-97-CR-142-2)
September 2, 1999
Before POLITZ, WIENER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Pedro Garza pleaded guilty to one count of alien transporting. Garza appeals
his sentence, contending that the district court erred by increasing his offense level
for using a minor to commit the offense.
At sentencing, both Garza and the minor allegedly used in the offense
testified. The district court found neither to be credible.1 In addition, the testimony
*
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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.
1
United States v. Huskey,
137 F.3d 283 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Sotelo,
97 F.3d
782 (5th Cir. 1996).
of other witnesses supported the imposition of the enhancement. We find no
reversible error. Accordingly, the judgment appealed is AFFIRMED.
2