* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata and coll ateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### OCT 1 2003 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. ANGEL H. SERRANO, Defendant-Appellant. No. 02-3442 (District of Kansas) (D.C. No. 02-CR-20011-01-JWL)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before SEYMOUR , MURPHY , and O’BRIEN , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a dec ision on the briefs without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1 (G). The case is, therefore, ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

I. INTRODUCTION Appellant-Defendant Angel Serrano pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of co caine. In calculating Serrano’s base offense level for purposes of arriving at a se ntence under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, the district court attribute d to Serrano approximately sixteen kilograms of cocaine from two prior distrib utions, in addition to 7.911 kilograms for the crime of conviction. Serrano appeals his sentence, asserting that the di strict court erred in calculating his offense level by including the sixt een kilograms from two uncharged drug distributions in the determination o f drug quantity. Exercising jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this cou rtaffirms . The district court did not err in crediting Serrano’s prior admissions that he distributed approximately sixteen kilograms of cocaine on two p rior occasions. Furthermore, the district court did not err in relying on corrob orating hearsay statements from Serrano’s co-defendant because the statements bore sufficient indicia of reliability.
II. BACKGROUND Upon receiving information from a confidential info rmant that Serrano intended to sell approximately eight-to-ten kilogra ms of cocaine to John Doran, police set up surveillance of Serrano’s residence. Immigration and Naturalization-3-

Service Special Agent Tim Ditter observed Serrano e xiting his residence and placing a duffle bag into his vehicle. Serrano was subsequently stopped by a Kansas City, Kansas police officer for an improper lane change. During the stop, Serrano admitted to possessing eight kilograms of c ocaine. Following his arrest, Agent Ditter interviewed Serr ano. During the interview, Serrano admitted that he was on his way to sell the cocaine to Doran when he was stopped. He also admitted to selling approximately eight kilograms of cocaine to Doran on at least two other occasions

. Serrano was indicted on one count of possession wit h intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine, in violation o f 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). In the same indictment, Doran was charged with attempting to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of cocaine. Prior to trial, Serrano filed a motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of the traffic stop. The district court den ied the motion and found Serrano’s version of the stop to be unbelievable. Serrano later entered a plea of guilty to the possession with intent to distribute count. At Serrano’s sentencing, Agent Ditter testified that during Serrano’s postarrest interview, Serrano admitted to selling appro ximately eight kilograms of cocaine to Doran on at least two prior occasions. In addition, Agent Ditter testified that he also interviewed Doran, who confi rmed that Serrano sold him1 We admonish both defense and government counsel forviolating 10th Cir.

R. 28.2(A)(2) and 28.2(B) by failing to attach to t heir briefs a copy of the district court’s sentencing decision from which this appeal was taken. -4- approximately eight kilograms of cocaine at least two other times. In contrast to his prior statements to Agent Ditter, Serrano testi fied that he only sold four kilograms of cocaine to Doran on one other occasion

. The district court sentenced Serrano to 135 months’ imprisonment. In doing so, the court concluded that Serrano was resp onsible for approximately sixteen kilograms of cocaine from the two prior sal es to Doran. Specifically, the district court found that Serrano admitted to AgentDitter that he participated in two prior drug transactions involving approximately eight kilograms each. The court also concluded that Doran’s corroboration was sufficiently reliable and determined that Serrano’s contrary testimony was no t credible.
III. DISCUSSION Serrano argues that the district court erred in cal culating his drug quantity because his earlier admission to selling approximat ely sixteen kilograms of cocaine to Doran on two prior occasions and Doran’s corroboration were not sufficiently reliable to support the calculation. 1 This court reviews the district court’s findings as to drug quantity for clear erro r and its interpretation and application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo

. United States v. Asch , 207 F.3d 1238, 1242 (10th Cir. 2000). Credibility dete rminations are within the sound-5-

discretion of the district court and are given cons iderable deference by this court. United States v. Gobey , 12 F.3d 964, 967 (10th Cir. 1993). In making its sentencing determination, the distric t court may estimate drug quantities attributable to the defendant if the inf ormation relied upon bears “sufficient indicia of reliability.” United States v. Wacker , 72 F.3d 1453, 1478 (10th Cir. 1996) (quotations omitted). As long as the evidence is sufficiently reliable, hearsay evidence can be considered in the court’s determination. United States v. Beaulieu , 893 F.2d 1177, 1179 (10th Cir. 1990); U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a). In addition, the district court can base its drug quan tity estimate on the defendant’s own admissions. Wacker , 72 F.3d at 1478. In this case, the district court’s drug quantity de termination was not clearly erroneous. The district court was entitled to cred it Serrano’s earlier admission that he sold approximately eight kilograms of cocai ne to Doran at least twice before. See Gobey , 12 F.3d at 967; see also Asch , 207 F.3d at 1242-43 (deferring to district court’s determination that defendant’s admission at time of arrest was more credible than her testimony at sentencing). Furthermore, the district court did not err in rely ing on Doran’s corroboration of the two prior sales because the st atement was sufficiently reliable. Wacker , 72 F.3d at 1478; U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a). In a separ ate interview with Agent Ditter, Doran confirmed that Serrano sol d to him about sixteen-6-

kilograms of cocaine on two different occasions. D oran’s estimation of the amount sold by Serrano matched the original admissi on of Serrano. Moreover, Serrano never denied selling cocaine to Doran, but later changed his story only as to the amount he sold. In total, this was sufficie ntly reliable evidence to support the district court’s drug quantity determination.
IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the foregoing reasons, Serrano’s sentenc e is AFFIRMED

. ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Michael R. Murphy Circuit Judge