### The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, United States District Judge 1 

### for the District of Nebraska. ___________ No. 95-3823

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Corey J. Hupp, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: May 2, 1996 Filed: May 10, 1996

___________ Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
CoreyJ. Hupp challenges the 41-month sentence imposed by th e District Court after he pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribut e 1 methamphetamine and t o possess it with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846 (1988). We affirm.

After an evidentiary hearing at which Marcia and Ron Delgad o testifiedabout methamphetamine distributions they had made to Hupp, the Distri ct Court found Hupp was responsible for two ounces o f methamphetamine, and was not entitled to an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1.
Hupp first contends that the parties agreed he would be hel d accountable for only one ounce of methamphetamine, and that the

### -2-

govern ment breached the plea agreement by introducing evidence of othe r drug activity at the evidentiary hearing. We reject this contention, as the change-of-plea transcript clearly reflects t hat the parties agreed the amount of methamphetamine at issue would be determined at sentencing, and that there was no sug gestion of any limit on that amount. Moreover, Hupp did not make this argument below.
We also reject Hupp's argument that the District Court clearly erred in calculating the amount of methamphetamine for which he was responsible. See United States v. Williams , 77 F.3d 1098, 1100 (8th Cir. 1996) (standar d of review). The District Court's decision to cr edit Marcia's testimony in making its finding is virtually unassailable on appeal. See United States v. Wessels , 12 F.3d 746, 754 (8th Cir. 1993), ce rt. denied , 115 S. Ct. 105 (1994). Hupp maintains that the District Court should not have held him accountable for methamphetamine Marcia distribut ed to him around Christmas 1992, the month befor e the beginning date of the conspiracy as alleged in th e indictment. Ron, however, testified that he distribute d methamphetamine to Hupp during the relevant peri od, and to the extent Hupp receivedmethamphetamine from Marcia in the month prior to the beginning date alleged in the i ndictment, this conduct was part of "the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan involving the offense of conviction" and th us constituted relevant conduct. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(2) ; Williams , 77 F.3d at 1100; United States v. Chatman , 982 F.2d 292, 294 (8t h Cir. 1992).

Finall y, we conclude the District Court did not clearly err i n refusing to grant Hup p an acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, because Hupp denied the exten t of his role in the offense. See U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.1(a)); United States v. Evans , 51 F.3d 764, 766 (8th Cir. 1995 ) (standard of review).
Accordingly, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

### -3- A true copy.

Attest:
CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.