## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-1269

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Nelson De Jesus Jaramillo-Martinez, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: June 3, 1998 Filed: June 5, 1998

___________ Before BOWMAN, Chief Judge, WOLLMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Nelson De Jesus Jaramillo-Martinez (Martinez) pleaded guilty to possessing w ith the inten t to distribute cocaine hydrochloride, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1 ) (1994). Because he possessed 11.18 k ilograms of cocaine when apprehended, he was subject to a statutory mandatory minim um sentence of 120 months imprisonment. See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) (where offense involves 5 or more kilograms of cocaine , person is subject to sentenc e of at least 10 years imprisonment). Martinez maintained that he qualified for the “safety valve,” seeU.S. Sentencing Guidelines M anual § 5C1.2 (1997), and thus should be sentenced within the 87-to-108-month guidelinesThe Honorable George Howard, Jr., United States District Judge f or the Eastern 1 District of Arkansas. -2- imprisonment range which would otherwise have applied. After hearing testimony at sentencing, however, the District Court concluded that Martinez had not truthfull y 1 providedall the information he had about the offense, denied him safety-valve relief, and se ntenced him to 120 months imprisonment and five years supervised release

. Martinez appeals, and we affirm.

We agree wit h the government that the District Court did not clearly err i n finding that Martinez had not truthfully provided all the information he had about the instant offense, and that thus Martinez did not qualify for the safety valve. See 1 8 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5) (1994) (court shall impose sente nce pursuant to guidelines without regard t o any statutory minimum sentence if court finds at sentencing, among othe r things, that “the defendant has truthfully provided to the Government all information and evidence the

defendant has concerning the offense”); U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5C1.2(5) (1997) (same); United States v. Romo , 81 F.3d 84, 86 (8th Cir

. 1996) (stand ard of review). Martinez failed to show that he had satisfied thi s require ment: the District Court credited a police officer & s testimony that Martine z would know the identities of at least some of the people involved given th e quantity and dollar value of the d

rugs, yet Martinez terminated his debriefing interview upon being questioned

about the identity of the person who arranged his cocaine run and without disclosing the first and last name of any other person associated with the offense, other than his co-defendant & s. At sentencing, M artinez was reluctant to respond whether his co-defendant--who had not cooperated with the government--knew the identities o f anyon e else involved in the offense, and he declined the opportunity to continu e sentencing to allow him to par ticipate in further debriefing. See Romo , 81 F.3d at 85- 86 (affirming a finding that dru g defendant failed to satisfy safety valve & s fifth element because he did not disclose all information he possessed about the crime and his chain-3-

of distribution, including identities and participation of others; defendant had burde n to show, through affirmative conduct, he gave government truthful information). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the District Court. A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.