United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS June 22, 2004
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-31142
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ROOSEVELT JACKSON,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 03-CR-50045-ALL
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roosevelt Jackson appeals his sentence imposed following his
guilty plea conviction for distribution of 50 grams or more of
crack cocaine. Jackson was sentenced to 188 months’ imprisonment
to be followed by a five-year term of supervised release.
Jackson argues that the district court erred as a matter of
law in making an adjustment of his offense level pursuant to
U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) because the Government provided no
evidence that he had knowledge of, or access to, the weapons
found in a bedroom dresser in his residence. He argues that
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 03-31142
-2-
there was no evidence of a temporal or spatial relationship
between the weapons and his drug-trafficking activities.
The Government presented evidence that Jackson regularly
sold crack cocaine from his residence. Crack cocaine as well as
drug paraphernalia were discovered in the residence at the same
time that the weapons and ammunition were found there. Thus,
there was proof of a temporal and spatial relationship among the
weapon, the drug-trafficking activity, and Jackson. United
States v. Eastland, 989 F.2d 760, 770 (5th Cir. 1993).
The state court’s order for the destruction of the weapons
discovered at the time and place that Jackson was found in
possession of drugs for which he was convicted raised an
inference that the weapons belonged to Jackson. Jackson failed
to rebut this inference. The defendant has the burden to rebut
the reliable evidence used against him at sentencing. United
States v. Solis, 299 F.3d 420, 455 (5th Cir. 2002). Jackson has
not carried that burden.
The sentence imposed is AFFIRMED.