IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-41328
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOE WILLIAM PINEDA, JR.,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. V-00-CR-43-ALL
--------------------
June 22, 2001
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Joe William Pineda, Jr., appeals his sentence following his
conviction for one count of possession with intent to distribute
14.5 grams of cocaine. Pineda contends that the district court
erred in basing his sentence upon relevant conduct pursuant to
U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3; he argues that the district court erroneously
relied upon testimony detailing his involvement with trafficking
both powder and crack cocaine.
Pineda first argues that the district court erred in finding
that his dealings in powder cocaine should not have been used to
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 00-41328
-2-
calculate his sentence. This argument is frivolous. Although
the district court found evidence pertaining to Pineda’s dealings
in powder credible, it specifically declined to base his sentence
on this evidence. Rather, the relevant-conduct enhancement was
based solely on Pineda’s dealings in crack cocaine.
Pineda also challenges the district court’s decision to
enhance his sentence due to his dealings in crack cocaine. This
decision was based on the district court’s findings of
credibility. These credibility determinations are entitled to
deference. See United States v. Huskey, 137 F.3d 283, 291 (5th
Cir. 1998). Because the district court’s relevant-conduct
findings are supported by the testimony that it found credible,
the district court’s decision to enhance Pineda’s sentence for
this conduct is not erroneous. Pineda has not shown that the
district court erred in enhancing his sentence based on relevant
conduct. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.