IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-11569
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALFREDO CASTRO-ALVAREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:96-CR-230-G
- - - - - - - - - -
August 14, 1997
Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alfredo Castro-Alvarez (Castro) asserts that his conviction
should be set aside because he did not waive in writing his right
to a jury trial in contravention of Fed. R. Crim. P. 23(a). As
Castro entered a knowing and voluntary guilty plea in accordance
with Fed. R, Crim. P. 11, this assertion has no merit. See
Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242-44 (1969); United States v.
Johnson, 1 F.3d 296, 298 (5th Cir. 1993) (en banc).
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 96-11569
-2-
The district court did not clearly err in increasing
Castro’s offense level by two points for his leadership role in
the offense under § 3B1.1 of the Guidelines because the evidence
showed that Castro supervised at least one other member of the
conspiracy. United States v. Ayala, 47 F.3d 688, 690 (5th Cir.
1995); United States v. Ronning, 47 F.3d 710, 711-12 (5th Cir.
1995).
The district court also did not clearly err by calculating
the amount of drugs involved in the offense. The commentary to
§ 2D1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines explains how to calculate
quantities of drugs involved in agreements to sell controlled
substances. U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, comment. (n. 12). Castro concedes
that he negotiated with the DEA Agent to provide an additional 20
ounces of heroin and makes no argument that he did not intend to
produce, and was not reasonably capable of producing, 20 ounces
of black tar heroin. The district court’s finding on the amount
of heroin involved in the conspiracy was not clear error. United
States v. Mergerson, 4 F.3d 337, 345 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.