UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41017
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAVIER RODRIGUEZ-BARCO,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(L:01-CR-430-ALL)
_________________________________________________________________
August 12, 2002
Before WIENER, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges:
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Javier Rodriguez-Barco pleaded guilty,
pursuant to a plea agreement, to possession with intent to
distribute more than one kilogram of methamphetamine. He appealed
his sentence, insisting that, under United States Sentencing
Guideline (“U.S.S.G.”) § 1B1.8(a) or (b), his sentence should not
have been enhanced for importing the drug from Mexico because the
government first learned of the importation from him during an
interview after he entered into a cooperation agreement with agents
of the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”). The government
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
responds that it had knowledge of facts sufficient to constitute a
preponderance of the evidence that the methamphetamine had been
imported from Mexico before Rodriguez told the DEA agents about it.
We affirm.
In the district court, Rodriguez did not make the argument
that he raises on appeal, so we review for plain error. Before
being turned over to the DEA agents and cooperating with them,
Rodriguez made known to the Border Patrol agents that he was a
citizen of Mexico, and that he had recently crossed the border. He
advised that the SUV he was driving, which had Mexican license
plates, did not belong to him. In addition to that information,
the Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”) contains information
obtained before Rodriguez cooperated with the DEA, such as the
facts that he changed his story about ownership of the SUV and
disclosed that he was to be paid $5,000 by an unknown person for
driving the vehicle north in Texas. Additionally, the large
quantity of methamphetamine hidden in the door panels of the SUV
supports an inference of importation.
Having reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of
counsel, and heard oral argument from counsel, we are satisfied
that the pre-cooperation evidence and reasonable inferences from it
are sufficient to support the sentencing court’s finding of
importation by a preponderance of the evidence. As the law
requires no more, the sentence imposed by the district court is, in
all respects,
AFFIRMED.
2
S:\OPINIONS\UNPUB\01\01-41017.0.wpd
4/29/04 5:46 pm
3