Filed: Apr. 03, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50516 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GUILLERMO FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (EP-94-CR-261-DB) _ April 18, 1996 Before KING, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Flores appeals his sentence for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court c
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-50516 Summary Calendar _ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GUILLERMO FLORES, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (EP-94-CR-261-DB) _ April 18, 1996 Before KING, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Guillermo Flores appeals his sentence for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the district court cl..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 95-50516
Summary Calendar
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
GUILLERMO FLORES,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(EP-94-CR-261-DB)
_________________________________________________________________
April 18, 1996
Before KING, SMITH, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Guillermo Flores appeals his sentence for conspiracy to
possess cocaine with intent to distribute, arguing that the
district court clearly erred by sentencing him as a manager in
the offense. Flores also urges that his role in the offense was
minor. Flores objected to the increase in his offense level, but
he did not object that the facts reported by the probation
officer were incorrect. Flores testified at the sentencing
hearing, but the district court implicitly rejected Flores’
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 Local Rule 47.5.4.
version of his role in the offense as not credible. The district
court’s determination that Flores was the manager in charge of
transporting the cocaine is plausible in light of the record as a
whole and, thus, not clearly erroneous. United States v.
Edwards,
65 F.3d 430, 432 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.
2