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

No. 14

- 50269 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. MARIO ALANIS ALEMAN , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:13

- CR

- 511

- 1

Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Mario Alanis Aleman challenges his sentence of , inter alia , 360 months’ imprisonment imposed after he pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess , with intent to distribute , 50 grams or more of methamphetamine , in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) , 841 (b)(1)(B) , & 846

. He asserts the district court erred by using unreliable information to determine the drug quantity used to calculate

* Pursuant to 5 th Cir. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except un der the limited circumstances set forth in 5 th Cir. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 20, 2014 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-50269 Document: 00512843446 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2014No. 14

- 50269

his base

- offense level , and by increasi ng his offense level for his role as an organizer or leader. Although post

- Booker , the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only, and a properly preserved objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for reasonableness under an abuse

- of

- discretion standard , the district court must still properly calculate the advisory Guidelines

- sentencing range for use in deciding on the sentence to impose. Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). In that respect, for issues preserved in district court, its applicat ion of the Guidelines is reviewed de novo ; its factual findings , only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Cisneros

- Gutierrez , 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008 ). A factual finding is not clearly erroneous so long as it is plausible in the light of the record as a whole. E.g., United States v. Njoku , 737 F.3d 55, 77 (5th Cir. 2013), cert. denied , 134 S. Ct. 2319 (2014) (citation omitted)

. O ur analysis is limited to the quantity of drugs transported from Dallas , Texas, to Austin , Texas, b ecause this is the drug quantity the district court assessed in determining Aleman’s base

- offense level

. The district court also relied on the co - conspirator s ’ statements , reported through an investigating officer’ s testimony at the sentencing hearing, to find this drug quantity

. A n investigation revealed Aleman and his co - conspirator s distributed drugs. The

co - conspirator s , according to the officer, corroborated each other’s statements by reporting the same location of the supply of drugs, amount of drugs transported per trip, and method of concealment. Aleman’s uncontradicted , post

- arrest statement further corroborated their statements regarding the locat ion of Aleman’s supply of drugs. Given this indicia of reliability, particularly the consistenc y and specificity of the co - conspirator s’ statements, and the absence of any rebuttal evidence, the district court’s drug

- quantity

2 Case: 14-50269 Document: 00512843446 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/20/2014No. 14

- 50269 finding was plausible in the light of the record as a whole and , therefore , not clearly erroneous. E.g., Njoku , 737 F.3d at 7 8

. The district court’s finding that Aleman was an organizer or leader pursuant to Guideline § 3B1.1(a) was also plausible in the light of the record as a whole and , therefore , not clearly erroneous. See id

. ; see also United States v. Betancourt , 422 F.3d 240 , 245

- 46 (5th Cir. 2005 )

. Aleman managed the supply of drugs from his source in Dallas, coordinated the delivery of drugs to Austin, and supplied drugs to his co - conspirator s for distribution. E vidence that co - conspirator s sold drug s on Aleman’s behalf , and that Aleman paid them to transport drugs and drug proceeds , substantiates the conclusion that Aleman exercise d control and authority over his co - conspirator s. Additionally, evidence demonstrates Aleman received a larger share of the proceeds b ecause his co - conspirator s sold drugs Aleman supplied on a consignment basis , and they returned most of the proceeds to him. Aleman also exercised decision

making authority by refusing to work with certain people. AFFIRMED.

3 Case: 14-50269 Document: 00512843446 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/20/2014