UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

No. 99-4044

JEFFERSON RIASCOS-VALENCIA, a/k/a

William Keith Patterson, a/k/a

Jason,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.

Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge.

(CR-97-40)

Submitted: February 29, 2000

Decided: April 10, 2000

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

W. Terry Sherrill, CREFT, SHERRILL & ASSOCIATES, Charlotte,

North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert J. Higdon, Jr., OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Jefferson Riascos-Valencia was convicted pursuant to his guilty

pleas of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and

crack cocaine, possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, and

conspiracy to import cocaine. On appeal, he alleges that the district

court erred in its calculation of the amount of drugs attributable to

him and by denying his motion for a downward adjustment as a

minor/minimal participant.1 Finding no reversible error, we affirm.

Riascos-Valencia was part of a major drug conspiracy that operated

primarily in the Winston-Salem, North Carolina, area from 1989-

1996. The record shows that most of the co-conspirators were from

the same neighborhood in Colombia. The conspirators imported the

cocaine from Columbia and Ecuador and distributed it in North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, and New York. Riascos-Valencia was arrested

during a controlled purchase and was found to be in possession of

approximately 492 grams of crack cocaine.

We will uphold the district court's factual determination concerning the amount of drugs attributable to Riascos-Valencia absent clear

error. See United States v. Lamarr, 75 F.3d 964, 972 (4th Cir. 1996).

In addition, Riascos-Valencia bore the burden of showing that he was

entitled to a reduction in his base offense level, and the district court's

factual determination concerning his role in the offense will only be

reversed if it was clearly erroneous. See United States v. Campbell,

935 F.2d 39, 46 (4th Cir. 1991).

The investigating agent testified that, based on interviews with several co-conspirators, Riascos-Valencia worked with Juan Alomia, the

head of the "cell" in Winston-Salem, in Ecuador setting up a trans-

_________________________________________________________________

1 See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.2 (1998).

 2
shipment point to facilitate the smuggling of cocaine from Columbia

into the United States. After establishing the base in Ecuador,

Riascos-Valencia and Alomia entered this country illegally as stowaways aboard a merchant vessel in April 1996. Once in the United

States, Riascos-Valencia assisted Alomia in the delivery of cocaine

and crack cocaine, controlled the monetary aspects of Alomia's operation, cooked cocaine into crack, traveled to various ports to assist in

receiving the imported cocaine,2 and developed his own customer

base.

Riascos-Valencia's primary argument at sentencing (and now on

appeal) was that the statements of his co-conspirators were not credible or reliable. The district court resolved this issue against him, and

we find nothing in the record which would justify overturning the

court's factual findings. See United States v. D'Anjou, 16 F.3d 604,

614 (4th Cir. 1994) (district court's credibility determinations are

entitled to great deference). As a result, we find that Riascos-Valencia

failed to meet his burden of showing that the information in the presentence report concerning the amount of drugs attributable to him

was inaccurate. See United States v. Terry, 916 F.2d 157, 162 (4th

Cir. 1990). We further find that the evidence shows Riascos-Valencia

was at least as culpable as the other members of the conspiracy and

therefore was not entitled to a mitigating role adjustment under USSG

§ 3B1.2.

Accordingly, we affirm Riascos-Valencia's conviction and sentence. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the material before the court

and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

_________________________________________________________________

2 The district court attributed ten kilograms of cocaine to RiascosValencia as a result of two of these trips. The agent's testimony suggested that the total amount attributable to him was probably much

higher.

 3