UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-4180
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ALBERTO SANMIGUEL, JR., a/k/a Alberto
Sanmiguel, a/k/a Big Albert,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (3:04-cr-00255)
Submitted: September 24, 2007 Decided: October 11, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Randolph M. Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North
Carolina; Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Alberto Sanmiguel, Jr., pled guilty to conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute marijuana and two counts of
possession with intent to distribute marijuana, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841, 846 (2000). The district court found Sanmiguel was
a leader or organizer of a conspiracy consisting of at least five
members and therefore found a four-level enhancement to Sanmiguel’s
offense level was proper pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual (“USSG”) § 3B1.1(a) (2005). The court sentenced Sanmiguel
to 151 months’ imprisonment, at the bottom of the applicable
sentencing guidelines range, and Sanmiguel appealed. Finding no
error, we affirm.
On appeal, Sanmiguel contests only the USSG § 3B1.1(a)
enhancement. We review the district court’s determination of the
defendant’s role in the offense for clear error. United States v.
Sayles, 296 F.3d 219, 224 (4th Cir. 2002). To qualify for a
four-level increase under § 3B1.1(a), a defendant must have been
“an organizer or leader of a criminal activity that involved five
or more participants or was otherwise extensive.” After reviewing
the relevant materials, including the transcript of the sentencing
hearing, we find no clear error in the district court’s application
of the four-level enhancement for Sanmiguel’s leadership role.
Accordingly, we affirm Sanmiguel’s sentence. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
- 2 -
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -