IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-30928

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

THERON DELAWRENCE JOHNSON,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 1:16-CR-124-1

Before JOLLY, COSTA, and HO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Theron Delawrence Johnson appeals the sentence imposed following his 

guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to 

distribute methamphetamine, cocaine, and cocaine base. Johnson argues that 

the district court erred in imposing a two-level enhancement under § 3B1.1(c) 

based on its finding that he was a leader in the offense because it incorrectly 

relied on the Government’s discretionary decision to charge him as a leader in 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 2, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-30928 Document: 00514708610 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/02/2018
No. 17-30928

2

this indictment. In addition, he asserts that he was a middle-man, did not 

have control over the other coconspirators, and did not reap larger profits.

The application of an aggravating-role enhancement is a finding of fact 

that this court reviews for clear error. United States v. Ochoa-Gomez, 777 F.3d 

278, 281-82 (5th Cir. 2015). In determining if an enhance ement applies, “a 

district court is permitted to draw reasonable inferences from the facts, and 

these inferences are fact-findings reviewed for clear error.” United States v. 

Caldwell, 448 F.3d 287, 290 (5th Cir. 2006).

The district court considered the entire conspiracy, including individuals 

who were charged in a separate conspiracy, determined that there was only 

one supplier above Johnson, and concluded that the enhancement was 

appropriate based on Johnson’s relative role in the overall conspiracy. The 

enhancement was also based on information in the Presentence Report, 

providing that Johnson fronted drugs to his three codefendants, directed one 

codefendant to deliver drugs on several occasions, and set the price for drugs 

in certain transactions. These activities support a finding that he acted as a 

leader or organizer. Further, Johnson’s supervision of one coconspirator is 

sufficient to support the two-level enhancement. See United States v. Curtis, 

635 F.3d 704, 720 (5th Cir. 2011); United States v. Turner, 319 F.3d 716, 725 

(5th Cir. 2003). Further, Johnson’s argument that he was a middle-man is 

unavailing as there “can be more than one person who qualified as a leader or 

organizer in a criminal association or conspiracy.” See United States v. Cooper, 

274 F.3d 230, 247 (5th Cir. 2001). Because the district court’s finding that 

Johnson was a leader in the offense is plausible in view of the record as a whole, 

the district court did not clearly err in imposing the two-level enhancement 

under § 3B1.1(c). See Ochoa-Gomez, 777 F.3d at 281.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 17-30928 Document: 00514708610 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/02/2018