IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-10826
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TERRY SANDERS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:02-CR-3-12
--------------------
January 20, 2003
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Terry Sanders (“Sanders”) appeals the sentencing following
his guilty plea conviction for possession with the intent to
distribute methamphetamine and aiding and abetting. Sanders
argues that the district court erred in applying U.S.S.G.
§ 4A1.1(d) to his criminal history score because he was not on
probation when he committed the instant offense of conviction.
This court reviews the district court’s application of the
Sentencing Guidelines de novo. United States v. Charles, 301
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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. 02-10826
-2-
F.3d 309, 312-13 (5th Cir. 2002) (en banc). The presentence
report (PSR) generally bears sufficient indicia of reliability,
and the district court may rely on it when making the factual
determinations required by the guidelines. United States v.
Ayala, 47 F.3d 688, 690 (5th Cir. 1995).
The district court is permitted to consider unadjudicated
offenses which occur after the offense of conviction for
sentencing purposes, but only if they are “relevant conduct”
under U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3. United States v. Vital, 68 F.3d 114, 118
(5th Cir. 1995). In order for the unadjudicated offenses to rise
to the level of “relevant conduct”, they must be a “part of the
same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of
conviction.” Id.
Sanders was placed on probation on October 2, 2001. The PSR
and the indictment indicated that Sanders’ participation in drug
operation continued until 2002. Therefore, the district court
did not err in applying U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d), because Sanders was
on probation when he committed the relevant conduct related to
the instant offense. See United States v. Harris, 932 F.2d 1529,
1538-39 (5th Cir. 1991); Vital, 68 F.3d at 118; § 4A1.1(d),
comment. (n.4).
AFFIRMED.