United States v. Rider ( 2021 )

Case: 20-40548 Document: 00515906499 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/21/2021
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
No. 20-40548 June 21, 2021
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Correy James Rider,
Defendant—Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 6:18-CR-42-6
Before Wiener, Southwick, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Defendant-Appellant Correy James Rider was convicted of one count
of conspiring to possess and distribute methamphetamine (Count One); one
count of aiding and abetting in the knowing and intentional possession of
methamphetamine with the intent to distribute (Count Three); one count of
*
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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited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: 20-40548 Document: 00515906499 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/21/2021
No. 20-40548
aiding and abetting in the knowing and intentional possession of
methamphetamine with the intent to distribute (Count Twelve); and one
count of aiding and abetting in the knowing and intentional possession of
cocaine base with the intent to distribute (Count Thirteen). He was
sentenced within the guidelines range to a total of 360 months of
imprisonment and a total of five years of supervised release. He now appeals
his conviction and sentence, asserting that the evidence was insufficient to
support his convictions on Counts Three and Twelve and that the application
of an enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) was unwarranted in
light of the record.
Rider moved for a judgment of acquittal in the district court, so we
review his sufficiency of evidence claims de novo. United States v. Brown, 727
F.3d 329, 335 (5th Cir. 2013). In doing so, we ask whether “any rational trier
of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a
reasonable doubt.” Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted;
emphasis added by the court).
Rider’s brief focuses on whether there was sufficient evidence that he
actually or constructively possessed the methamphetamine. He makes only
conclusional assertions regarding aiding and abetting. However, actual or
constructive possession of controlled substances is not an element of the
offense of aiding and abetting the possession of controlled substances with
the intent to distribute. See 18 U.S.C. § 2; 21 U.S.C. § 841; United States v.
Scott, 892 F.3d 791, 798 (5th Cir. 2018). Rider has thus failed to present a
meaningful challenge to his convictions on Counts Three and Twelve. See
United States v. Green, 964 F.2d 365, 371 (5th Cir. 1992). In any event, a
review of the testimony confirms there was ample evidence to support his
aiding and abetting convictions on both counts, and we would affirm even if
the issue were properly briefed.
2
Case: 20-40548 Document: 00515906499 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/21/2021
No. 20-40548
Rider also contends that the Government failed to prove that his co-
defendant’s possession of a firearm was reasonably foreseeable, thus
warranting the § 2D1.1(b)(1) enhancement. We review the district court’s
interpretation and application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo and its
findings of fact for clear error. United States v. Odom, 694 F.3d 544, 546–47
(5th Cir. 2012). We find no clear error in the district court’s application of
this enhancement given the evidence before that court. See United States v.
Aguilera-Zapata, 901 F.2d 1209, 1215 (5th Cir. 1990) (footnote omitted). We
decline Rider’s invitation to disregard our binding precedent in favor of that
of other circuits. See United States v. Penaloza-Carlon, 842 F.3d 863, 864 &
n.1 (5th Cir. 2016).
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
3