Filed: Dec. 13, 2002
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-51100 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PANFILO PITA-RAYO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-99-CR-13-10 - December 12, 2002 Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Panfilo Pita-Rayo appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to comm
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-51100 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus PANFILO PITA-RAYO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. W-99-CR-13-10 - December 12, 2002 Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Panfilo Pita-Rayo appeals the sentence imposed by the district court following his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to commi..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-51100
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PANFILO PITA-RAYO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-99-CR-13-10
--------------------
December 12, 2002
Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Panfilo Pita-Rayo appeals the sentence imposed by the
district court following his guilty-plea conviction for
conspiracy to commit money laundering and maintaining a place for
unlawful distribution of methamphetamine. He argues that the
district court erred in increasing his offense level by two
points for obstruction of justice pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1.
Because Pita-Rayo, through his attorney, presented materially
false information concerning his residence and employment history
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 01-51100
-2-
at the arraignment and detention hearing in an attempt to obtain
release pending trial, the district court did not err in
increasing his offense level by two points for obstruction of
justice. See U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, comment. (n.4(f)); United States
v. Montano-Silva,
15 F.3d 52, 53-54 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.