United States v. Sergio Contreras ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 14-10585      Document: 00512968406         Page: 1    Date Filed: 03/13/2015
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 14-10585
    Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    FILED
    March 13, 2015
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    Plaintiff-Appellee
    v.
    SERGIO CONTRERAS,
    Defendant-Appellant
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Texas
    USDC No. 3:13-CR-266-1
    Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Sergio Contreras appeals the 60-month sentence imposed for his
    conviction for possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine.
    He contends that the district court erred in denying him a safety-valve
    reduction.
    We review the district court’s findings of fact for clear error and its legal
    conclusions de novo. United States v. Miller, 
    179 F.3d 961
    , 963-64 (5th Cir.
    * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
    Case: 14-10585    Document: 00512968406     Page: 2   Date Filed: 03/13/2015
    No. 14-10585
    1999).   We need not decide whether to apply plain error review because
    Contreras’s claim of error fails even under the ordinary standard of review.
    A defendant may receive a two-level reduction in his offense level if he,
    inter alia, provides truthful information to the Government concerning the
    offense of conviction.    See U.S.S.G. §§ 2D1.1(b)(16) (2013), 5C1.2(a)(5);
    18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5). Contrary to Contreras’s argument, Miller does not
    preclude us from concluding that Contreras’s untruthfulness about the source
    of cocaine in the instant offense independently justify the denial of the safety-
    valve reduction so long as there is evidence that Contreras lied. See 
    Miller, 179 F.3d at 967-69
    . The district court’s finding that Contreras was not truthful
    was plausible in light of the record as a whole and not clearly erroneous. See
    United States v. Montes, 
    602 F.3d 381
    , 384 (5th Cir. 2010).
    The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-10585

Judges: Prado, Owen, Graves

Filed Date: 3/13/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024