Case ID: f-appx_697/html/0333-01.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. Luciano SOLIS-RUIZ, Defendant-Appellant
    No. 16-41301 Summary Calendar
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Filed September 6, 2017
    Lauretta Drake Bahry, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Carmen Castillo Mitchell, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
    Marjorie A. Meyers, Kathryn Shephard, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
    Before REAVLEY, SOUTHWICK, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Luciano Solis-Ruiz appeals his conviction and sentence for importing five kilograms or more of cocaine into the United States. 21 U.S.C. §§ 952, 960(a)(1), (b)(1); 18 U.S.C. § 2. His offense involved 28 kilograms of cocaine. The district court sentenced him at the bottom of the guideline range to 87 months of imprisonment. Solis-Ruiz challenges the denial of a mitigating role reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, and he raises a foreclosed challenge to the sufficiency of the factual basis for his guilty plea.

Whether a defendant was a minor or minimal participant is a factual question that we review for clear error. United States v. Torres-Hernandez, 843 F.3d 203, 207 (5th Cir. 2016). A district court need not expressly weigh each factor in deciding whether to grant a mitigating role reduction. Id. at 209. Solis-Ruiz decided to bring his common-law wife and her 15-year old son with him when he tried to bring the drugs into the United States. Thus, he did participate in planning the criminal activity to some degree, and he had some degree of discretion in performing the acts. See § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3(C)(ii), (iv)). The district court’s finding that Solis-Ruiz was not “substantially less culpable than the average participant in the- criminal activity” was plausible in light of the record as a whole. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3(A)); see Torres-Hernandez, 843 F.3d at 207.

Solis-Ruiz argues that his factual basis was insufficient because it failed to establish that he knew the type and quantity of drugs that he was importing. He seeks to reduce his conviction to importation of marijuana, which carries a five-year maximum prison sentence under § 960(b)(4). As he acknowledges, we rejected the same argument under a nearly identical drug statute, 21 U.S.C. § 841. See United States v. Betancourt, 586 F.3d 303, 307-09 (5th Cir. 2009).

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.