Court Opinion

ID: 9387453
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-18 00:00:28.661476+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:13.527020
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50503         Document: 00516714451             Page: 1      Date Filed: 04/17/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                        Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 22-50503
                                                                                      FILED
                                                                                  April 17, 2023
                                     Summary Calendar
                                     ____________                                Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                      Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                      Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Maria Guadalupe Rivas Camacho,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                           for the Western District of Texas
                               USDC No. 3:21-CR-1276-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Wiener, Elrod, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Maria Guadalupe Rivas Camacho was convicted after a jury trial of
   one count of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more
   of a substance or mixture containing a detectable amount of
   methamphetamine. Rivas Camacho was sentenced to a term of imprisonment
   of 120 months to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release. On

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50503      Document: 00516714451          Page: 2   Date Filed: 04/17/2023

                                    No. 22-50503

   appeal, Rivas Camacho argues that the district court erred by denying her
   requested jury instruction for mistake of fact. She further argues that the
   evidence was insufficient to support her conviction because the Government
   did not adequately corroborate her statements to law enforcement and did
   not prove the alleged conspiracy. With respect to her sentence, Rivas
   Camacho contends that the district court erred by failing to apply a safety-
   valve reduction and by denying her request for a mitigating role reduction.
          First, we review the refusal to issue a jury instruction for abuse of
   discretion. United States v. Orfi-Nwosu, 549 F.3d 1005, 1008 (5th Cir. 2008).
   The district court errs in rejecting a proposed instruction only if the
   instruction was (1) substantially correct, (2) was not substantially covered in
   the charge given to the jury, and (3) concerned an important issue in the trial
   so that the failure to give it seriously impaired the defendant’s ability to
   present a given defense. United States v. John, 309 F.3d 298, 304 (5th Cir.
   2002). When read in its entirety, the record shows that the requested
   instruction on mistake of fact was substantially encompassed in the jury
   charge. Accordingly, Rivas Camacho has not demonstrated that the district
   court abused its discretion in refusing the proposed instruction. See Orfi-
   Nwosu, 549 F.3d at 1008.
          When viewing all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the
   Government, a reasonable jury could have found that the evidence
   established Rivas Camacho’s knowledge and participation in the drug
   conspiracy given her actions and the large quantity of methamphetamine
   recovered from inside the house. See United States v. Barnes, 803 F.3d 209,
   215 (5th Cir. 2015); United States v. Masha, 990 F.3d 436, 442–43 (5th Cir.
   2021). The jury, hearing Rivas Camacho’s testimony and observing her
   demeanor as well as hearing the testimony of the Government witnesses, was
   entitled to evaluate and resolve whether her statements should be viewed as
   believable. See United States v. Sanchez, 961 F.2d 1169, 1173 (5th Cir. 1992).

                                             2
Case: 22-50503      Document: 00516714451           Page: 3    Date Filed: 04/17/2023

                                     No. 22-50503

          The record provides a valid basis for the district court’s decision not
   to apply the safety-valve adjustment. United States v. Oti, 872 F.3d 678, 699-
   700 (5th Cir. 2017). The burden was on Rivas Camacho to show that she
   truthfully provided the Government with all relevant information and
   evidence regarding the offense. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f)(5); United States v.
   Flanagan, 80 F.3d 143, 146–47 (5th Cir. 1996). The district court questioned
   Rivas Camacho and reviewed the entirety of the record to make its own
   finding that she was ineligible for safety-valve relief. Given the tenor of the
   court’s questioning, it is apparent that the court did not believe Rivas
   Camacho had been forthright. See United States v. Towns, 718 F.3d 404, 411
   (5th Cir. 2013). Insofar as Rivas Camacho argues that the district court failed
   to make sufficient findings to allow meaningful appellate review, there is no
   indication that a more detailed explanation would have resulted in a lesser
   sentence. Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 135 (2009).
          Rivas Camacho has not shown she was entitled to a mitigating role re-
   duction. First, the record does not show that she requested that the district
   court articulate a factual basis for denying such a reduction, and, thus, she
   has not shown that the district court plainly erred in that respect. See United
   States v. Bello-Sanchez, 872 F.3d 260, 266 (5th Cir. 2017); see also Puckett, 556
   U.S. at 135. Next, the factors present a “mixed bag” and “support a plausi-
   ble judgment in either direction.” Bello-Sanchez, 872 F.3d at 264–65. Thus,
   the district court’s determination that Rivas Camacho was at least an average
   participant in the conspiracy is plausible in light of the record as a whole. See
   United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 2016).
          AFFIRMED.

                                              3