Case ID: f-appx_104/html/0433-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM: \n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Frazier THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-30059.
    Conference Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Decided Aug. 17, 2004.
    Cristina Walker, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Shreveport, LA, for Plaintiff-Appel-lee.
    
      Rebecca L. Hudsmith, Federal Public Defender, Lafayette, LA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PICKERING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Frazier Thomas appeals the 210-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Thomas contends that the district court erred in enhancing his sentence by two levels pursuant to United States Sentencing Guideline § 2Dl.l(b)(l), which applies when a dangerous weapon was possessed during a drug trafficking offense.

The district court noted at sentencing that it would have given Thomas the same 210-month sentence even if the two-level dangerous-weapon enhancement did not apply. The sentence imposed is within the guideline range that would have applied without the enhancement. Under such circumstances, the error in applying the enhancement, if any, is harmless. See United States v. Rogers, 126 F.3d 655, 661 (5th Cir.1997).

Thomas also has filed a letter pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 28(j) calling our attention to the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). However, we have held that Blakely does not apply to the United States Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 465 (5th Cir.2004).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.