United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-50993

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Adrian Hunt, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 7:20-CR-134-1

Before Owen, Chief Judge, and Southwick and Wilson, Circuit

Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Adrian Hunt appeals the 262-month, within-guidelines sentence of 

imprisonment imposed following his guilty-plea conviction of conspiring to 

possess with the intent to distribute 50 grams or more of actual 

methamphetamine. He argues that the district court erred in adjusting his 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 23, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-50993 Document: 00516143773 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/23/2021
No. 20-50993

2

offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1), which provides for a twolevel enhancement “[i]f a dangerous weapon (including a firearm) was 

possessed[.]” § 2D1.1(b)(1).

This court applies an abuse-of-discretion standard to preserved claims 

of sentencing error, under which it reviews a district court’s factual findings 

for clear error. United States v. Odom, 694 F.3d 544, 546 (5th Cir. 2012). The 

Government is required to prove the applicability of § 2D1.1(b)(1) by a 

preponderance of the evidence. See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 

F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). One way it can do so is to demonstrate that 

another individual involved in the commission of an offense possessed a 

weapon and that the defendant could have reasonably foreseen that 

possession. Id. at 764-65. Should the Government succeed in this, “the 

burden shifts to the defendant to show that it was clearly improbable that the 

weapon was connected with the offense.” United States v. Ruiz, 621 F.3d 

390, 396 (5th Cir. 2010). “A factual finding is not clearly erroneous if it is 

plausible, considering the record as a whole.” Id.

The district court applied § 2D1.1(b)(1) here because Angelina 

Leatherwood, one of Hunt’s coconspirators, was found to possess a pistol 

and a large amount of methamphetamine when stopped after leaving a 

residence used for drug trafficking. Hunt argues that Leatherwood’s 

possession of a gun was not reasonably foreseeable to him. Assuming this 

argument is preserved, it fails nonetheless because Hunt has not shown that 

the district court’s foreseeability finding was clearly erroneous. “Ordinarily, 

one co-conspirator’s use of a firearm will be foreseeable because firearms are 

‘tools of the trade’ in drug conspiracies.” United States v. Mergerson, 4 F.3d 

337, 350 (5th Cir. 1993). Hunt was with Leatherwood before her arrest, and 

that same day the two had reportedly returned from one of Leatherwood’s 

weekly trips to renew her supply of methamphetamine. The district court’s 

foreseeability finding is plausible on the record before us, and Hunt’s 

Case: 20-50993 Document: 00516143773 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/23/2021
No. 20-50993

3

challenge is therefore unavailing. See Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d at 764-65; 

Ruiz, 621 F.3d at 396.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 20-50993 Document: 00516143773 Page: 3 Date Filed: 12/23/2021