United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 22-50503

Summary Calendar

____________

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee, 

versus

Maria Guadalupe Rivas Camacho, 

Defendant—Appellant. 

______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:21-CR-1276-1 

______________________________

Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Maria Guadalupe Rivas Camacho was convicted after a jury trial of 

one count of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more 

of a substance or mixture containing a detectable amount of 

methamphetamine. Rivas Camacho was sentenced to a term of imprisonment 

of 120 months to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release. On 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 17, 2023

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-50503 Document: 00516714451 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/17/2023
No. 22-50503

2

appeal, Rivas Camacho argues that the district court erred by denying her 

requested jury instruction for mistake of fact. She further argues that the 

evidence was insufficient to support her conviction because the Government 

did not adequately corroborate her statements to law enforcement and did 

not prove the alleged conspiracy. With respect to her sentence, Rivas 

Camacho contends that the district court erred by failing to apply a safetyvalve reduction and by denying her request for a mitigating role reduction.

First, we review the refusal to issue a jury instruction for abuse of 

discretion. United States v. Orfi-Nwosu, 549 F.3d 1005, 1008 (5th Cir. 2008). 

The district court errs in rejecting a proposed instruction only if the 

instruction was (1) substantially correct, (2) was not substantially covered in 

the charge given to the jury, and (3) concerned an important issue in the trial 

so that the failure to give it seriously impaired the defendant’s ability to 

present a given defense. United States v. John, 309 F.3d 298, 304 (5th Cir. 

2002). When read in its entirety, the record shows that the requested 

instruction on mistake of fact was substantially encompassed in the jury 

charge. Accordingly, Rivas Camacho has not demonstrated that the district 

court abused its discretion in refusing the proposed instruction. See OrfiNwosu, 549 F.3d at 1008. 

When viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the 

Government, a reasonable jury could have found that the evidence 

established Rivas Camacho’s knowledge and participation in the drug 

conspiracy given her actions and the large quantity of methamphetamine 

recovered from inside the house. See United States v. Barnes, 803 F.3d 209, 

215 (5th Cir. 2015); United States v. Masha, 990 F.3d 436, 442–43 (5th Cir. 

2021). The jury, hearing Rivas Camacho’s testimony and observing her 

demeanor as well as hearing the testimony of the Government witnesses, was 

entitled to evaluate and resolve whether her statements should be viewed as 

believable. See United States v. Sanchez, 961 F.2d 1169, 1173 (5th Cir. 1992).

Case: 22-50503 Document: 00516714451 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/17/2023
No. 22-50503

3

The record provides a valid basis for the district court’s decision not 

to apply the safety-valve adjustment. United States v. Oti, 872 F.3d 678, 699-

700 (5th Cir. 2017). The burden was on Rivas Camacho to show that she 

truthfully provided the Government with all relevant information and 

evidence regarding the offense. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5); United States v. 

Flanagan, 80 F.3d 143, 146–47 (5th Cir. 1996). The district court questioned 

Rivas Camacho and reviewed the entirety of the record to make its own 

finding that she was ineligible for safety-valve relief. Given the tenor of the

court’s questioning, it is apparent that the court did not believe Rivas 

Camacho had been forthright. See United States v. Towns, 718 F.3d 404, 411

(5th Cir. 2013). Insofar as Rivas Camacho argues that the district court failed 

to make sufficient findings to allow meaningful appellate review, there is no

indication that a more detailed explanation would have resulted in a lesser 

sentence. Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).

Rivas Camacho has not shown she was entitled to a mitigating role reduction. First, the record does not show that she requested that the district 

court articulate a factual basis for denying such a reduction, and, thus, she

has not shown that the district court plainly erred in that respect. See United 

States v. Bello-Sanchez, 872 F.3d 260, 266 (5th Cir. 2017); see also Puckett, 556 

U.S. at 135. Next, the factors present a “mixed bag” and “support a plausible judgment in either direction.” Bello-Sanchez, 872 F.3d at 264–65. Thus, 

the district court’s determination that Rivas Camacho was at least an average 

participant in the conspiracy is plausible in light of the record as a whole. See

United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 2016). 

AFFIRMED.

Case: 22-50503 Document: 00516714451 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/17/2023