United States v. Castillo

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-20227
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LEONCIO CASTILLO,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-00-CR-766-1)
________________________________________________________________
October 31, 2002
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Leoncio Castillo appeals his bench trial conviction for
inducing aliens to come, enter, or reside in the United States.
Castillo contends jurisdiction in the district court was obtained
improperly because it should only have been exerted over him
pursuant to an extradition treaty. He concedes, however, that this
contention is foreclosed by United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
U.S. 655 (1992). He presents the issue solely to preserve it for
further review by the Supreme Court.
Castillo also contends the evidence was insufficient to adjust
his sentence for being a “leader” under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1. This
court reviews that determination only for clear error. E.g.,
United States v. Miranda, 248 F.3d 434, 446 (5th Cir. 2001), cert.
denied, 122 S. Ct. 410 (2002). The district court did not clearly
err in determining that Castillo was an organizer or leader of
criminal activity involving five or more participants. See
U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a). Castillo personally planned, organized, and
participated in the offense, making the arrangements with the
aliens while they were still in Costa Rica and personally taking
them across the border from Honduras to Guatemala. Although
Castillo presented evidence that he did not own property in
Nicaragua, there was unrebutted evidence suggesting that property
owned by him in Honduras was used in the offense; and the district
court was free to disregard the unsworn assertions that the
presentence report was unreliable regarding Castillo’s identity.
See United States v. Cabrera, 288 F.3d 163, 175 n.13 (5th Cir.
2002); United States v. Ayala, 47 F.3d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED
2