Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gabriel Benjamin ILLESCAS-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-02-15
Citations: 218 F. App'x 353
Docket Number: No. 06-40169
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gabriel Benjamin ILLESCAS-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 218
Pages: 353–354

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gabriel Benjamin ILLESCAS-DIAZ, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 06-40169
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Feb. 15, 2007.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Margaret Christina Ling, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office Southern District of Texas, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Defendant-Appellant Gabriel Benjamin Ulescas-Diaz (Illescas) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine. He argues that the district court clearly erred in denying him a role adjustment pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 (2004).
We hold that the record does not establish that Illescas, whose role was, at a minimum, to transport 18.41 kilograms of cocaine from Mexico to Dallas, Texas, was "plainly among the least culpable of those involved in the conduct of a group." See § 3B1.2, comment, (n.4). He has therefore not shown that the district court clearly erred in denying him a minimal-role adjustment. See United States v. Villanueva, 408 F.3d 193, 203 n. 9 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 268, 163 L.Ed.2d 241 (2005).
Similarly, Illeseas's self-proclaimed role as courier was not peripheral to the advancement of the offense. The district court therefore did not clearly err in denying him an adjustment for a minor role in the offense. See United States v. Miranda, 248 F.3d 434, 446-47 (5th Cir.2001).
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.