Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Manuel VILLANUEVA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-10-20
Citations: 111 F. App'x 312
Docket Number: No. 03-41569
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Manuel VILLANUEVA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 111
Pages: 312–312

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Manuel VILLANUEVA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-41569.
Conference Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Decided Oct. 20, 2004.
James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, David Hill Peck, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Roland E. Dahlin, II, Federal Public Defender, Arturo Villarreal, III, Aurora Ruth Bearse, Houston, TX, for Defendants Appellant.
Before JOLLY, JONES, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Manuel Villanueva appeals from his conviction of transporting illegal aliens. He contends that the district court erred by adjusting his offense level based on his intentionally or recklessly creating a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2Ll.l(b)(5). Villanueva seeks leave to file a supplemental brief in which he contends that the adjustment violated Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. -, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), because it was based on facts that were not charged in his indictment, were not found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, and were not admitted by him at his plea hearing. The motion to file it is GRANTED.
The district court's finding that Villanueva had used heroin shortly before driving was not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Humphrey, 104 F.3d 65, 71 (5th Cir.1997). Villanueva correctly concedes that his Blakely contention is foreclosed by Untied States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464 (5th Cir.2004), petition for cert. filed (July 14, 2004) (No. 04-5263).
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.