Opinion ID: 3012029
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Henrietta Chambers

Text: Chambers first appeals the District Court’s decision not to grant her a downward adjustment of two levels in her Offense Level pursuant to U.S.S.G. 3B1.2(b) for her minor role in the conspiracy. Because the District Court’s denial of the adjustment rested on the factual determination that Chambers was not a minor participant, we review that decision for clear error. United States v. Brown, 250 F.3d 811, 818 (3d Cir. 2001); United States v. Price, 13 F.3d 711, 735 (3d Cir. 1994). The record supports the District Court’s determination. The District Court adopted the findings of Chambers’ Presentence Investigation Report and assessed Chambers’ relationship to the other participants, the importance of her actions to the venture, and her awareness of the nature and scope of the conspiracy. United States v. Isaza-Zapata, 148 F.3d 236, 239 (3d Cir. 1998). The District Court considered that Chambers had a direct relationship with Bradley, the manager of the conspiracy; that she assisted Pressley and Pamela Reeves when they imported cocaine in May; that she received wired funds to facilitate the conspiracy and obtain the cocaine; that she knew she was importing drugs; and that she willingly participated in the importation. In light of these facts, the District Court’s finding that Chambers did not play a minor role is not clearly erroneous.
Chambers next appeals the District Court’s decision not to grant her a two-point downward adjustment under 18 U.S.C. 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. 5C1.2 (the safety valve provision). We review the District Court’s factual findings for clear error and exercise plenary review over the District Court’s application of the facts to the law. United States v. Sabir, 117 F.3d 750, 754 (3d Cir. 1997). We find no error. The District Court found that as of the time of the sentencing hearing, Chambers had not truthfully provided the government with all relevant information regarding the conspiracy, and therefore that she had not met prong (5) of the safety valve requirements. Specifically, the District Court adopted the PSI findings that Chambers had provided Pressley and Reeves with cocaine-filled shoes and found Chambers’ denial of her participation to be a lie. These factual findings are not clearly erroneous. Applying the safety valve provision de novo, we conclude that Chambers’ failure to tell the government the truth about her participation in the May importation up to and including the time of the sentencing hearing was sufficient to warrant the District Court to refuse to apply the safety valve. Accordingly, we will affirm Chambers’ sentence. ____________________ TO THE CLERK OF COURT: Please file the foregoing opinion. /s/ Majorie O. Rendell