Court Opinion

ID: 9895073
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-04 00:00:37.400678+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:54.531183
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30172         Document: 00516956362             Page: 1      Date Filed: 11/03/2023

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________
                                                                                United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit
                                       No. 23-30172
                                     Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                     ____________                               November 3, 2023
                                                                                  Lyle W. Cayce
   United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Anthony E. Johnson,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 5:18-CR-232-3
                      ______________________________

   Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          Anthony Johnson appeals his 30-month sentence for conspiracy to
   commit bank and wire fraud with forfeiture allegations and bank fraud with
   forfeiture allegations (two counts). Finding no error, we affirm.
          Johnson claims that the district court erred by failing to grant him a
   mitigating-role adjustment for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2. He contends

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30172        Document: 00516956362          Page: 2    Date Filed: 11/03/2023

                                      No. 23-30172

   that, because of his poor eyesight, limited education, receipt of disability ben-
   efits, nominal payments for the offense conduct, and lack of discretion and
   planning as compared to his codefendants, he is entitled to a role reduction.
          Whether an appellant is a minor or minimal participant is a factual
   determination reviewed for clear error.           United States v. Gomez-Valle,
   828 F.3d 324, 327 (5th Cir. 2016). “A factual finding is not clearly erroneous
   if it is plausible in light of the record read as a whole.” Id.
          The record shows that after stating the totality-of-the-circumstances
   test, the district court employed a fact-specific, well-reasoned approach
   before denying Johnson a mitigating-role adjustment. In particular, the court
   found that Johnson was an average participant in the conspiracy because he
   personally negotiated 33 counterfeit checks at different locations, amounting
   to a $110,733 loss. Though the court acknowledged that Johnson had no dis-
   cretionary authority, it concluded that his criminal conduct made him an
   essential cog in the conspiracy. The court further found that Johnson’s con-
   duct demonstrated that he understood the scope and structure of the conspir-
   acy whereby counterfeit checks were being passed at various locations to the
   benefit of all conspirators.
          Johnson has failed to show how his conduct was peripheral to the
   advancement of the illicit activity. See United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608,
   613–14 (5th Cir. 2016). Considering the record as a whole, the refusal to grant
   a mitigating-role adjustment was not clearly erroneous. See Gomez-Valle,
   828 F.3d at 327.

          AFFIRMED.

                                            2