[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 16

- 10974 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:15

- cr
- 20529

- JAL

- 8
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus
RHAKEIM THOMAS, a.k.a. King,
Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ (February 3, 2017) Before WILLIAM PRYOR , MAR TIN and ANDERSON , Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 1 of 32 Rhakeim Thomas appeals his sentence of 57 months of imprisonment for conspir ing to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance

. 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) , 846 . Thomas argues that the district court “ failed to make specific, individualized findings” explaining its decision to hold him accountable for all the drugs sold during his participat ion in the conspiracy . We affirm.
The district court did not clearly err
. Thomas admitted in hi s factual proffer
that he “willingly joined [a] plan” to “distribut[e] illegal narcotics” and that he “manag ed [two] trap houses [from which he] s old narcotics” and “regularly updated [the leaders of the conspiracy] regarding the status of the trap houses, and
reque sted resupplies when the supply of narcotics was running low

. ” Thomas also
ad mitted that his coconspirators sol d cocaine base , powder cocaine , Ethylone , Alprazolam , and marijuana and that “law enforcement recovered more than 83 grams of crack cocaine and m ore than 160 grams of powder cocaine.” These admissions provided specific and reliable evidence on which the district court based its finding that “[t]he scope of [Thomas’s] agreement was to sell illegal narcotics from the trap houses” for “ the time period ” he participated in the conspiracy. See United States v. Lawrence , 47 F.3d 1559, 1566 (11th Cir. 1995).
T he district court was entitled to, in its words , hold Thomas “accountable for his sales and the sales of other persons [of the various types of narcotics] . . . during the time period for which he sold drugs at the trap house” because “the conduct of

Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 2 of 33 each of those persons was within the scope of the jointly undertaken criminal activity,” was made “in furtherance of that cr iminal activity[,] and was reasonably foreseeable in connection with that criminal activity.” See United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) (Nov. 2015); United States v.
Ismond , 993 F.2d 1498, 1499 (11th Cir. 1993) (“For sentencing purpos es a member of a drug conspiracy is liable for his own acts and the acts of others in furtherance of the activity that the defendant agreed to undertake and that are reasonably foreseeable in connection with that activity.”). And Thomas agreed that the gov ernment made a “reasonable” estimate that, during his participation, the conspiracy sold 120 grams of cocaine base and 120 grams of powder cocaine. Ample evidence supported the amount of drugs attributed to Thomas.
We AFFIRM Thomas’s sentence. Case: 16-10974 Date Filed: 02/03/2017 Page: 3 of 3