Case: 13-11410 Document: 00512740102 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/20/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
No. 13-11410
Fifth Circuit
FILED
Summary Calendar August 20, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
LOUIS GRIEGO, JR., also known as Big Lou,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 7:13-CR-3
Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Louis Griego, Jr. appeals the 168-month sentence he received for
conspiring to distribute methamphetamine. He contends that the district court
improperly calculated his guidelines range when it concluded that he was not
entitled to an additional one-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility
under U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b).
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Case: 13-11410 Document: 00512740102 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/20/2014
No. 13-11410
The Government acknowledges that it erred in withholding the
reduction on the ground that Griego did not waive his right to appeal. See
United States v. Villegas Palacios, --- F.3d ----, 2014 WL 2119096, at *1 (5th
Cir. May 21, 2014). But we need not vacate the sentence, or resolve whether
the Government’s other alleged bases for withholding the reduction were
proper, because any error was harmless. See United States v. Richardson, 676
F.3d 491, 511–12 (5th Cir. 2012); United States v. Bonilla, 524 F.3d 647, 656
(5th Cir. 2008).
After considering the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, the
district court unequivocally stated that it would impose the 168-month
sentence regardless whether the additional one-point reduction should apply.
Indeed, the sentence imposed was within the guidelines range that would have
applied if the one-level reduction had been granted. Accordingly, any error in
calculating Griego’s guidelines range was harmless. See Richardson, 676 F.3d
at 511.
AFFIRMED.
2