Court Opinion

ID: 17930
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 07:09:10+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:45.840823
License: Public Domain

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                       FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
                       _____________________

                           No. 98-41496
                         Summary Calendar
                      _____________________

                    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                Plaintiff-Appellee,

                              versus

                       TOMMY DARRELL SHARP,

                                             Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

           Appeal from the United States District Court
                 for the Eastern District of Texas
                            (98-CR-7-3)
_________________________________________________________________

                           May 24, 1999

Before POLITZ, BARKSDALE, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Tommy Darrell Sharp challenges his sentence following his

guilty plea to use of a communication facility to facilitate a drug

trafficking offense, asserting that the district court erred in

enhancing his sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) for

possessing a handgun during the commission of the offense.       He

contends that he was not the owner of the handgun, did not utilize

or physically possess it, and did not direct that it be used during

the commission of the offense.

     As is well established, we review a district court’s factual

findings, such as the application of § 2D1.1(b)(1), only for clear

     *
      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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
error.   E.g., United States v. Buchanan, 70 F.3d 818, 827-28 (5th

Cir. 1995). Inasmuch as Sharp knew his codefendant possessed a gun

during the transaction, we find no clear error. See United States

v. Thomas, 120 F.3d 564, 574 (5th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 118

S.Ct. 721 (1998).

                                                     AFFIRMED

                               - 2 -