### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 19

- 10793 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. FIDEL ALAIN MARTIN

- SOSA , Defendant

- Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:19

- CR

- 41

- 10

Before WIENER, HAYNES, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Fidel Alain Martin

- Sosa appeals the 135

- month sentence he received for conspiring to deal methamphetamine. He argues that the district court erred in denying him mitigating

- role and safety

- valve adjustment s. Seeing no error under our deferential standard for reviewing those rulings, we AFFIRM. We review the district court’s guidelines determinations for clear error. United States v. Sanchez

- Villarreal , 857 F.3d 714, 721 (5th Cir. 2017) ; United

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 1, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 19-10793 Document: 00515474568 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/01/2020No. 19

- 10793

2 States v. McElwee , 646 F.3d 328, 345 (5th Cir. 2011)

. A decision is not clearly erroneous if it is “plausible in light of the record as a whole.” United States v. Zuniga , 720 F.3d 587, 590 (5th Cir. 2013 )

. The mitigating

- role provision of the Sentencing Guidelines “ provides a range of adjustments for a defe ndant who plays a part in committing the offense that makes him substantially less culpable than the average participant in the criminal activity .” U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3(A)). The commentary to § 3B1.2 provides a “non

- exhaustive list of factors” to consider in determining whether to reduce the offense level , and, if so, by how much

. Id

. § 3 B 1

. 2, comment. (n.3(C)(i)

- (v)). T he burden is on the defendant to demonstrat e his entitlement to the downward adjustment. United States v. Castro , 843 F.3d 608, 613 (5th Cir. 2016). T he record details Martin

- Sosa’s participation in the drug transaction and demonstrates that he understood that he was involved in a conspiracy to traffic three kilograms of methamphetamine , that he participated in at least some of the planning or organizing for that crime , and that he would be paid for h is involvement. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3)(C)(i)

- (v) )

. Accordingly, application of the factors counsel s against the adjustment and demonstrate s that Martin

- Sosa was not “peripheral to the advancement of the illicit activity.” United States v. Villanueva , 408 F.3d 193, 204 (5th Cir. 2005) (citation omitted). Although the re may be some evidence weigh ing in favor of finding that Martin

- Sosa had a mitigating ro le , when some factors support the adjustment, but others do not, the district court does not clearly err in denying the adjustment

. See United States v. Bello

- Sanchez , 872 F.3d 260, 264

- 65 ( 5 th Cir. 2017). T he district court therefore did not clearly err in rejecting the mitigating

- role adjustment. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3(A)) ; s ee Zuniga , 720 F.3d at 590

. Case: 19-10793 Document: 00515474568 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/01/2020No. 19

- 10793

3 A two

- level “safety valve” adjustment applies for drug offenses if the defendant meets certain criteria

. Id

. § § 2D1.1(b)(18); § 5C1.2 (a). The district court held that Martin

- Sosa did not meet the requirement that he truthfully provide the G overnment with all known information about “the offense or offenses that were part of the same course of conduct or of a common scheme or plan

. ” Id. § 5C1.2 (a) (5) ; see 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5)

. T he defendant has the burden of establishing eligibility for such a reduction

. S ee United States v. Flanagan , 80 F.3d 143, 146

- 47 (5th Cir. 1996)

. The record contains evidence to suggest that Martin

- Sosa did not fully and truthfully provide the G overnment with all known information regarding his financial stake in the conspiracy or how he became involved in the c rime

. A s a result , the d istrict court did not clearly err in denying the safety

- valve adjustment

. See Zuniga , 720 F.3d at 590 (citation omitted). Finally, to the extent that Martin

- Sosa attempts to challenge the substantive reasonableness of his within

- guidelines sentence on t he basis that his sentence fails to take into account his entitlement to the safety

- valve and mitigating

- role adjustments, his claim is reviewed under a deferential abuse

of

- discretion standard. See Holguin

- Hernandez v. United States , 140 S. Ct. 762, 767 (2020). The record does not reflect that the district court failed to account for a factor that should have received significant weight, gave significant weight to an irrelevant or improper factor, or committed a clear error of judgment in balancing the 1 8 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors. See United States v. Smith , 440 F.3d 704, 708 (5th Cir. 2006) . Rather, Martin

- Sosa’s arguments amount to no more than a request for this court to reweigh the § 3553(a) factors, which this court will not do as the district cour t is “in a superior position to find facts and judge their import under § 3553(a) with Case: 19-10793 Document: 00515474568 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/01/2020No. 19

- 10793

4 respect to a particular defendant.” United States v. Campos

- Maldonado , 531 F.3d 337, 339 (5th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted)

. T he judgment of the district court is AFF IRMED

. Case: 19-10793 Document: 00515474568 Page: 4 Date Filed: 07/01/2020