United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-40734

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Juan Manuel Lira-Salinas, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:19-CR-1954-2

Before Costa, Ho, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Juan Manuel Lira-Salinas pleaded guilty to possession with intent to 

distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine and 500 grams or more of 

a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of 

methamphetamine and to conspiracy to do the same. The district court 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

July 14, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-40734 Document: 00515936970 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/14/2021
No. 20-40734

2

sentenced Lira-Salinas below the applicable guidelines range to concurrent 

terms of imprisonment of 168 months. He appeals the district court’s 

imposition of a two-level upward adjustment under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(2)

based on the district court’s finding that he made a credible threat of 

violence. Lira-Salinas argues that the message that he sought to convey to a 

coconspirator through the coconspirator’s girlfriend was not inherently 

threatening and that the circumstances establish that it was simply a 

cautionary warning to a friend. 

A district court’s application of § 2D1.1(b)(2) is a factual finding that 

this court reviews for clear error. See United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 

F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). “[A] district court is permitted to draw 

reasonable inferences from the facts, and these inferences are fact-findings 

reviewed for clear error as well.” United States v. Caldwell, 448 F.3d 287, 

290 (5th Cir. 2006). A finding is clearly erroneous “only if, based on the 

entirety of the evidence,” this court is “left with the definite and firm 

conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. Oti, 872 

F.3d 678, 699 (5th Cir. 2017). If the finding is “plausible in light of the record 

as a whole,” it is not clearly erroneous. Id. at 700 (internal quotation marks 

and citation omitted). 

The district court has wide discretion in determining which evidence 

to consider and whether to credit the testimony of witnesses. United States 

v. Edwards, 65 F.3d 430, 432 (5th Cir. 1995). The presentence report (PSR)

is presumed reliable, and a sentencing court may rely on the facts recounted 

in the PSR unless the defendant demonstrates by competent rebuttal 

evidence that the information is “materially untrue, inaccurate or

unreliable.” United States v. Harris, 702 F.3d 226, 230 (5th Cir. 2012) 

(internal quotation marks and citation omitted).

Case: 20-40734 Document: 00515936970 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/14/2021
No. 20-40734

3

Based on the unrebutted evidence presented at Lira-Salinas’s 

sentencing and the district court’s finding that his testimony was not 

credible, the district court reasonably inferred that the message that he 

sought to have conveyed to his coconspirator constituted a credible threat to 

use violence. See Caldwell, 488 F.3d at 290, 292; United States v. Buenrostro,

868 F.2d 135, 138 (5th Cir. 1989). Because the district court’s finding that 

Lira-Salinas made a credible threat to use violence was plausible in light of 

the record as a whole, its judgment is AFFIRMED. See Oti, 872 F.3d at 

700. 

Case: 20-40734 Document: 00515936970 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/14/2021