Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silton Russell GOUTREAUX, also known as "Pretty Boy", Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-29
Citations: 705 F. App'x 272
Docket Number: No. 16-11585 Summary Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silton Russell GOUTREAUX, also known as “Pretty Boy”, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 705
Pages: 272–272

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Silton Russell GOUTREAUX, also known as “Pretty Boy”, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-11585 Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Filed November 29, 2017
Shawn Lee Smith, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth, TX, James Wesley Hendrix, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Northern District of Texas, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Camille M. Knight, Burleson, Pate & Gibson, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellant
Silton Russell Goutreaux, Pro Se
Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Silton Russell Goutreaux appeals his 188-month, sentence of imprisonment for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetaraine, He argues that the district court's calculation of the amount of drugs that his offense involved rested on statements in the presentence report (PSR) that lacked sufficient indicia of reliability. However, Goutreaux fails to show that the information contained in the PSR was materially untrue, inaccurate, or unreliable. See United States v. Harris, 702 F.3d 226, 229-31 (5th Cir. 2012). Gou-treaux also challenges the two-level firearm enhancement in U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(l). The district court's determination that the enhancement applies is a factual finding, which we review for clear error. United States v. King, 773 F.3d 48, 52 (5th Cir. 2014). Goutreaux fails to show that the finding was not plausible in light of the record as a whole. See id.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cm. R. 47,5, the court, has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir, R. 47.5.4.