UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
___________________
No. 99-20271
Summary Calendar
__________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
GUADALUPE DAVILA, also known as Lupe,
also known as Homes, also known as Gordo,
also known as El Gordo,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-97-CR-226-6)
_________________________________________________________________
November 10, 1999
Before JONES, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Guadalupe Davila appeals his 140—month sentence following a
guilty-plea conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute cocaine and marijuana. Consistent wth his sentencing-
objection, Davila contends that the district court erred in
calculating his offense level based upon finding that his offense
involved 16 kilograms of cocaine.
The drug-amount finding is a factual determination, reviewed
only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Alford, 142 F.3d 825,
831 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 119 S. Ct. 514 (1998).
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
In this regard, a presentence report (PSR) is generally considered
sufficiently reliable “to be considered by the trial court as
evidence in making the factual determinations required by the
sentencing guidelines”. United States v. West, 58 F.3d 133, 138
(5th Cir. 1995).
Pursuant to the PSR, Davila relayed messages for the drug
conspiracy, collected drug proceeds, and was compensated in
cocaine; and, therefore, the PSR contained sufficient evidence to
support finding that it was foreseeable to Davila that the
conspiracy involved 16 kilograms of cocaine.
Davila did not present evidence to rebut the PSR’s findings.
Accordingly, the district court, which is entitled to adopt an
uncontested PSR without further inquiry, e.g., Alford, 142 F.3d at
832; United States v. Ayala, 47 F.3d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1995), did
not clearly err.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -