Court Opinion

ID: 990258
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:18:24.357325+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:35:31.517450
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                      No. 95-5932

CHARLES DAVID ROBERTSON,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington.
Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge.
(CR-95-116)

Submitted: July 25, 1996

Decided: August 19, 1996

Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and
PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Hunt L. Charach, Federal Public Defender, C. Cooper Fulton, Assis-
tant Federal Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appel-
lant. Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Sharon Mullen
Frazier, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia,
for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Charles David Robertson appeals the 46-month sentence he
received after his guilty plea to conspiracy to possess hydromorphone
(Dilaudid) with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A.§ 846 (West Supp.
1996). He asserts that the district court clearly erred in refusing to
award him a two-level adjustment for having a minor role in the
offense. United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual,
§ 3B1.2 (Nov. 1995). We affirm.

In June 1995, Robertson contacted an acquaintance about obtaining
$10,000 worth of K-4 Dilaudid for one Terry Whisman. In return for
arranging the deal, he was to receive $1000 from Whisman. The
acquaintance was a confidential informant who contacted officers of
the federal drug task force. At their direction, the informant told Rob-
ertson that her cousin could supply the Dilaudid. Over the next three
days, Robertson acted as go-between in a series of recorded telephone
calls, during which Whisman agreed to buy 400 Dilaudid tablets and
also expressed interest in buying morphine sulfate tablets and metha-
done. Before the meeting with the undercover officer at which they
were arrested, Whisman armed himself with a pistol and gave Robert-
son a loaded 9 mm pistol for protection.

A minor participant is one who is less culpable than most other par-
ticipants. USSG § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3). Robertson argues that he
was less culpable than Whisman because he was merely a facilitator,
was carrying a firearm which belonged to Whisman, and stood to gain
only $1000 for his assistance to Whisman. Because he played a very
active part in arranging the transaction, however, we cannot say that
the district court clearly erred in finding as a fact that Robertson had
more than a minor role in the offense.

We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district court. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

                    2
are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argu-
ment would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                    3