Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionshould not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circumstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNITED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 30341 Su m m ar yC al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t if f

- A pp el l ee v. ED U AR D O RA M O S- M EN D EZ, a l s o kno w n a s Eddi e , a l s o kn ow n a s Eduar do N a v a r r o R a m o s , D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f ort he W es t er n D i st r i c tof Loui si ana U SD C N o. 2: 05- C R

- 20084- 4 B ef ore G A R Z A , C L E M E N T , an d O W E N , C i rcui tJu dg es. P E R C U R IA M: * E du ardo R am os- M en dez ap pea l s th e sentence i m posedf or hi s c on vi ct i on o f c o ns pir ac y t o po s s e s s a n d di s t r ibut e f ivekil o gr am s o rm o r e o f c o c ai ne a nd m arij u an a. Th e di st ri ctcourtsentenced R am os- M en dez to 2 4 0 m o n th s of im p r is o n m e n t a n dfiv e y e a r s o f s u p e rv is e dre le a s e . R am os- M en dez assert s th at h e w as sentenced ba sed on m ere es t i m ates of t he quant i t i es of

c oc ai ne f

orw hi c h he w as r es ponsibl e a nd t hathi s c r i m i nal United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I LE D April23, 2010 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk Case: 09-30341 Document: 00511090058 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/23/2010N o. 09- 30341

2 hi s t o r y s c o r e o ve r r e pr e s e nt e dth es e ri o us ne s s o f hi s c r i m i nalhi s t o r y be c aus e o ne o f hi s pr i o rc o nvic t i on s w as b as e d o n c o nduc tt hatw as pa r to f t he i ns t ant co n sp ira cy . R a m o s-M e n d e z filedn o ob jec tion s to h is p re se n te n ce re p o rt (P S R ), an d these conten tions w ere not rai sed i n t h e di st ri ctcourt . Th u s th ey are r e v ie w e dfo rp la in e r r o ro n ly . S ee Un it ed S t ate s v. Hernan d ez- Mart i n ez , 485 F . 3d270 , 272
- 73 (5t h C i r. 200 7) . To d em on st rat e pl ai n err or, R am os- M en dez m u st id e n ti f

y an err or th at i s obvi ou s and t h at af fect ed h i s s u bstanti alri gh t s. Hernan d ez- Mart i n ez , 4 8 5 F. 3 da t2 7 3 . I f h e m a ke s t hi s s ho wi ng , we m ay e x e r c i s e o u rd is c r e tio n to n o tic e th e fo r fe ite de r r o ro n lyif “th e e r r o rs e r io u s ly a ff ects th e fa i rn ess , i n teg ri ty, or pu b l i c rep u tati on of j u d i ci a l p roce ed i n gs . ” Id . T h e am ou n tof

coc ai n e f

or w h i ch R a m os- M en dez w as consi dered r e s po ns ibl e w as b as e d o n an d c o ns i s t e ntw i t h t he i nf o r m at i o n pr o vi de d i n t he fact u albasi s acc om pa n yi n g h i s pl ea agreem en t . A dd i t i on al l y, R am os- M en dez pr o vi de s no e vi de nc e i ndi c at i ng t hathi s 1 99 9 o f fe ns e w as pa r to f

t he i ns t ant c o n s p ir a c y , a n dh is b a r e a s s e r t i o n n o w d o e s n o t d e m o n s tr a te p la in e r r o r . S ee Hernan d ez- Mart i n ez , 4 8 5 F .3 da t 2 7 3 ; cf . Un i t ed S t ate s v. W

ash i ngt on , 480 F . 3d 309 , 320 ( 5th C i r. 200 7) (recogni zi n g t h at defen d an tbears burd en of d e m o n str a tin gth a t in for m a tion inP S R is i n a cc u ra te oru n re li a b le). Ram o s - M e ndez al s o c o nt e nds t hathi s s e nt e nc e i s unfaira nd di s pr o po r t i o nat e c o m pa r e d t o o t he r s i n t he c o ns pir ac y i n li ghto f hi s r o l e a s “t he l o w l y m ul e i n t he o r ga ni z at i o n” and t hat hi s s e nt e nc e i l l us t r at e s t he fail ur e of t he G ui de l i ne s w i t h r e s pe c tt o de fe nda nt s w ho ha ve on l y a m i no rr o l e i n a con sp i ra cy . H e con ten d s th a t h is s e n ten ce ex cee d s w h a t w a s req u i redto ac c om pl i sh t he goal s of se nt enc i ng. Th e r ec or d r ef ut es t he as se r t i on that R a m o s -M e n d e z s e r v e d m e r e lya s alo w lytr a n s p o r te r . T h e fa c tu a l b a s is accom p a n y ing h i s pl ea agreem en tan d the fact u alf i n di n gs i n hi s PS R ref l ect t hathe a c t e d i n c o nc e r tw i t h hi s b r o t he r s , w h o f o r m e d the t o p l e ve l s o f t he o r g a n iz a tio n , in c o o r d in a tin g th e d is tr ib u tio n o f d r u g s a n dre c e ip t o f p r o c e e d s in an e xt e ns ivea nd vol u m i no us e nt e r pr i s e . Ram o s - M e nde z a l s o c hall e nge s t he Case: 09-30341 Document: 00511090058 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/23/2010N o. 09- 30341

3 di s t r i c tc o ur t ’ s e va l uat i o n o f t he fac t o rs u n de r1 8 U . S. C. § 3 55 3( a) , c o nt e ndi ng t hatas e nt e nc e o f

1 0 years o f

i m pr i s o nm e ntw o ul d ha veb e e n a de qua t e . The s u b s ta n tiv e re a s o n a b le n e s s o f R a m o s -M e n d e z ’ s s e n te n c e is re v ie w e dfo rp la in e r r o rb e c a u s e h e d idn o t o bje c t o n th a t g r o u n dinth e d is tr ic t c o u r t. S ee Un i t ed St at e sv . W

hi t e law , 580 F. 3d 256, 259- 60 ( 5th C i r . 2009) (r evi ew i ng s ubst ant ive r e a s o n a b le n e s s o f r e v o c a tio n s e n te n c e ); Un i t ed S t ate s v. Pel t i er , 5 0 5 F. 3 d3 8 9, 391
- 92 (5 th C ir. 2 0 0 7 ). R a m o s-M e n d e z ’ s w ith in -g u id e li n e s s e n te n ce i s presum ed r e a s o n a b le , seeUn i t ed S t ate s v. A lon zo , 4 35 F. 3d5 51 , 5 54 ( 5th Ci r . 2 00 6) , a nd he ha s no ts ho w n thatt he di s t r i c tc o ur tpl ai nly e r r e d i n i t s co ns i de r at i o n o f t he § 3 5 5 3 (a ) fa c to r s . S ee Pel t i er , 505 F. 3d at391- 92. L astly, R am os- M en dez com pl ai n s th at th e G overnm e n t d i d n otf i l e a m ot i on f

or a r edu ct i on of

hi s se n te n ce un der F ED . R. C RIM . P. 3 5 d e s p ite h is w i l l i n gn ess t o assi stt h e G overnm e n t b y t est if yi n g at th e t ri alof ot h er defenda n t s. R am os- M en dez’ s pl ea agreem en ti n di cat ed that t h e deci si on w he t he rt o f

i l e s uc h am o t i o n was e nt i r e l y w i t hi n t he G o ve r nm e nt ’ s di s c r e t i o n. H i s a s s e r t i o n i s una va i li ng, a s he pr o vi de s no b as i s f o r f i n di ng t hatt he G o ve r nm e nt ac t e d i m pr o pe r l y i n no tf i l i ng a Rul e 3 5 m o t i o n. See Un i t ed S t ate s v . G r ant , 4 9 3 F .3d4 6 4 , 4 6 7 (5t h C ir. 2 0 0 7 ). AF F I RMED. Case: 09-30341 Document: 00511090058 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/23/2010