Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Priscilla Ann CADENA, also known as Priscilla Cadena, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-27
Citations: 475 F. App'x 531
Docket Number: No. 11-50638
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Priscilla Ann CADENA, also known as Priscilla Cadena, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 475
Pages: 531–532

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Priscilla Ann CADENA, also known as Priscilla Cadena, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 11-50638
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
July 27, 2012.
Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Alexander Lee Calhoun, Austin, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before WIENER, ELROD, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Priscilla Ann Cadena pleaded guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute at least 1,000 kilograms of marijua na and conspiracy to commit money laundering. She has appealed her sentence and contends that the district court erred in determining the drug quantity attributable to her as relevant conduct.
The district court adopted the probation officer's finding that Cadena aided and abetted the distribution of 9,200 pounds (4,173.12 kilograms) of marijuana by her codefendant, James Cornelius, Jr. Because that finding was unrebutted, the district court was entitled to adopt it without further inquiry or explanation. See United States v. Vital, 68 F.3d 114, 120 (5th Cir.1995). Cadena has not shown that the district court's drug-quantity finding was clearly erroneous. See United States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 878 (5th Cir.1998). Moreover, because Cadena was subject to a mandatory minimum 120-month term of imprisonment, a reduction of her offense level would not have affected the length of her sentence. Accordingly, any error in determining the drug quantity at sentencing was harmless. See United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 752-53 (5th Cir.2009). The judgment is
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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.