eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 2021-04

United States v. Whitehouse ( 2021 )


Menu:
 
  • Case: 20-10633     Document: 00515830280         Page: 1     Date Filed: 04/21/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit                       United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 21, 2021
No. 20-10633                   Lyle W. Cayce
Summary Calendar                      Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Ronald George Whitehouse,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:19-CR-364-9
Before Clement, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Ronald George Whitehouse was convicted of conspiracy to possess
with intent to distribute a controlled substance, namely a substance
containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in violation of
    21 U.S.C. §§ 846
     and 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). Whitehouse was sentenced
*
Pursuant to 5th Circuit 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 20-10633       Document: 00515830280          Page: 2     Date Filed: 04/21/2021
No. 20-10633
below the advisory sentencing range to 224 months of imprisonment and
three years of supervised release. On appeal, he contends that the district
court erred when it determined that he was accountable for the
approximately 9.78 kilograms of methamphetamine carried by his co-
conspirator.
Our review is for clear error. See United States v. Barfield,
    941 F.3d 757
    , 761 (5th Cir. 2019), cert. denied,
    140 S. Ct. 1282
     (2020). We will affirm
the district court’s finding so long as “it is plausible in light of the record as
a whole.” United States v. Betancourt,
    422 F.3d 240
    , 246 (5th Cir. 2005)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Whitehouse fails to show that the district court’s findings were not
supported by reliable evidence. See United States v. Hinojosa,
    749 F.3d 407
    ,
414-15 (5th Cir. 2014); United States v. Zuniga,
    720 F.3d 587
    , 591-92 (5th Cir.
2013); United States v. Vela,
    927 F.2d 197
    , 201 (5th Cir. 1991). Furthermore,
he failed to demonstrate that the facts in his presentence report (PSR) were
materially untrue and did not present evidence rebutting the information
contained in the PSR. See United States v. Trujillo,
    502 F.3d 353
    , 357 (5th Cir.
2007).
The quantity of methamphetamine carried by the co-conspirator was
corroborated by the investigation.       Considering that Whitehouse drove
approximately ten hours round-trip to pick up the co-conspirator, who was a
stranger to him, at the request of Whitehouse’s source of supply, it was
plausible for the district court to determine that the 9.78 kilograms of
methamphetamine carried by the co-conspirator was reasonably foreseeable
to Whitehouse. See Hinojosa, 749 F.3d at 414-15; United States v. Caldwell,
    448 F.3d 287
    , 290 (5th Cir. 2006). Whitehouse has thus failed to show that
the district court’s relevant conduct drug quantity determination was clearly
erroneous. See Barfield, 941 F.3d at 761; see also Betancourt,
    422 F.3d at 246
    .
AFFIRMED.
2