Court Opinion

ID: 9943527
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-23 19:01:00.379316+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:47:11.533631
License: Public Domain

Case: 22-50687           Document: 117-1           Page: 1     Date Filed: 02/23/2024

           United States Court of Appeals
                for the Fifth Circuit
                                   ____________
                                                                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                      Fifth Circuit
                                    No. 22-50687
                                  Summary Calendar                                  FILED
                                  ____________                               February 23, 2024
                                                                               Lyle W. Cayce
United States of America,                                                           Clerk

                                                                    Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                          versus

Rodney MacPherson,

                                            Defendant—Appellant.
                   ______________________________

                   Appeal from the United States District Court
                        for the Western District of Texas
                            USDC No. 6:20-CR-134-1
                   ______________________________

Before Barksdale, Graves, and Oldham, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
       Rodney MacPherson challenges his below-Guidelines 170-months’
imprisonment imposed after his guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute at least 500 grams of a mixture or substance
containing methamphetamine; in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1),
841(b)(1)(A)(viii). He contends the court should not have attributed two

       _____________________
       *
           This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-50687        Document: 117-1       Page: 2     Date Filed: 02/23/2024

                                  No. 22-50687

kilograms of methamphetamine to him as relevant conduct because he did
not participate in the trip to Houston, Texas, for the transaction.
       Although post-Booker, the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only,
the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly
calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
38, 46, 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved
objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness
under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado-
Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751–53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues
preserved in district court, its application of the Guidelines is reviewed de
novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Cisneros-
Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008).          “[T]he district court’s
determination of what constitutes relevant conduct for purposes of
sentencing is a factual finding that is reviewed for clear error”. United States
v. Barfield, 941 F.3d 757, 761 (5th Cir. 2019) (citation omitted).
       The Guidelines provide that, when applied to “jointly undertaken
criminal activity”, relevant conduct includes “all acts and omissions of
others”: “(i) within the scope of the jointly undertaken criminal activity, (ii)
in furtherance of that criminal activity, and (iii) reasonably foreseeable in
connection with that criminal activity”. Guideline § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) & cmt.
n.3(A). “In a drug-trafficking case, relevant conduct may include all acts and
omissions ‘that were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme
or plan as the offense of conviction.’” Barfield, 941 F.3d at 762 (quoting
Guideline § 1B1.3(a)(2)).
       The district court did not clearly err in its challenged relevant-conduct
finding. MacPherson was engaged in a jointly undertaken criminal activity
with a co-conspirator who obtained the two kilograms of methamphetamine
from Houston; the trip by the co-conspirator, which MacPherson did not

                                        2
Case: 22-50687      Document: 117-1       Page: 3    Date Filed: 02/23/2024

                                No. 22-50687

take, was in furtherance of the criminal activity; and it was reasonably
foreseeable to MacPherson in connection with the criminal activity. See
Guideline § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B); Barfield, 941 F.3d at 761–63.
       AFFIRMED.

                                      3