Filed: Jan. 06, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10655 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RUBEN OLVERA CONTRERAS, SR., Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:98-CR-64-1 - January 6, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ruben Olvera Contreras, Sr. appeals his sentence for conspiring to import marijuana into the United States.
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-10655 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus RUBEN OLVERA CONTRERAS, SR., Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:98-CR-64-1 - January 6, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Ruben Olvera Contreras, Sr. appeals his sentence for conspiring to import marijuana into the United States. ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-10655
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
RUBEN OLVERA CONTRERAS, SR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:98-CR-64-1
--------------------
January 6, 2000
Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Ruben Olvera Contreras, Sr. appeals his sentence for
conspiring to import marijuana into the United States. Contreras
asserts that the district court’s increase of his criminal
history score pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d) was erroneous, as
the Government failed to prove that he committed any criminal
acts while under a criminal justice sentence.
“A sentence will be upheld on review unless it was imposed
in violation of law; imposed as a result of an incorrect
application of the sentencing guidelines; or [is] outside the
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 99-10655
-2-
range of the applicable sentencing guideline and is
unreasonable.” United States v. Santana-Castellano,
74 F.3d 593,
596 (5th Cir. 1996) (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted). We review a district court’s application of the
sentencing guidelines de novo and its findings of fact for clear
error. United States v. Stevenson,
126 F.3d 662, 664 (5th Cir.
1997).
Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Contreras pleaded
guilty to conspiring, from in and about June 1995, and continuing
to March 1999, to import marijuana into the United States.
Contreras admitted in writing in his plea agreement and under
oath at his rearraignment hearing that the factual resume for the
case, which adopted the July 1995, through March 1999, conspiracy
dates, was correct. Contreras does not dispute the factual
finding made in the PSR and adopted by the district court that he
was under a criminal justice sentence of probation from June 24,
1997, through June 23, 1998. Thus, Contreras has admitted that
he conspired to import marijuana during the June 24, 1997, to
June 23, 1998, period of his probation. See United States v.
Trevino,
131 F.3d 1140, 1141 (5th Cir. 1997).
The district court did not err, clearly or otherwise, in
finding that Contreras committed the instant offense while
serving a criminal justice sentence of probation. The judgment
is AFFIRMED.