Case ID: f-appx_344/html/0961-01.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. Francisco PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 08-51164
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Sept. 22, 2009.
    Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Ruben P. Morales, El Paso, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Francisco Perez pled guilty to counts 1 and 2 of a 13-count indictment charging him with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and aiding and abetting. Perez appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court erred by increasing his sentencing guidelines offense level by two, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(c) because he was an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of at least one participant in the criminal activity.

We review factual findings under the clearly erroneous standard and accord great deference to the trial judge’s application of the sentencing guidelines to the facts. In determining a defendant’s role in the offense, “a district court may adopt the facts contained in a PSR without further inquiry if those facts have an adequate evidentiary basis with sufficient indi-cia of reliability and the defendant does not present rebuttal evidence or otherwise demonstrate that the information in the PSR is unreliable.” Perez did not introduce rebuttal evidence during the sentencing hearing.

We cannot find that the district court clearly erred in enhancing Perez’s offense level pursuant to § 3Bl.l(c). Perez concedes that he hired others to load and drive drugs in connection with three drag transactions, facts making it plausible that he had a role as a supervisor or manager in the transactions.

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       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
     
      
      . U.S. v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 877 (5th Cir.1998).
     
      
      . U.S. v. Cabrera, 288 F.3d 163, 173-74 (5th Cir.2002).
     
      
      
        .See U.S. v. Aguilar, 237 Fed.Appx. 956, 959-60 (5th Cir.2007) (affirming a § 3B1.1 enhancement on the basis that the defendant had employed another person as a runner).