United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT November 11, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-60491
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
CLYDE W TAYLOR, JR
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Mississippi
USDC No. 2:03-CR-116-3-M
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, JONES and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Clyde W. Taylor, Jr., appeals from his sentence following a
guilty plea conviction for conspiracy to manufacture and attempt
to manufacture methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§§ 841(a) and 846. Taylor argues that the district court
erroneously held him accountable under relevant conduct for drug
quantities found on the person and in the vehicle of co-defendant
Tammie Renee Parker. He also argues that the district court
failed to use the weight of the pure methamphetamine when
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-60491
-2-
determining his offense level and erroneously denied him a
mitigating role adjustment.
Taylor was observed exiting a Bally's Casino with Parker and
co-defendant Richard Lane Hensley, Parker's husband, after a
confidential source reported that Hensley and Taylor were staying
in a motel room that contained a methamphetamine lab and that
Hensley was about to "cook a batch" of methamphetamine. Taylor
left in a separate vehicle from Parker and Hensley. Hensley and
Parker were then stopped while on their way to meet Taylor at the
motel room, which served as the base of operation for producing
methamphetamine. Hensley had just purchased precursor materials.
Taylor assisted in the production of the methamphetamine by also
purchasing precursor chemicals and by providing transportation
for Hensley.
We conclude that the district court did not clearly err by
attributing the drug quantities seized from both Hensley and
Parker to Taylor under relevant conduct. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3;
see also United States v. Rogers, 1 F.3d 341, 344-45 (5th Cir.
1993). A review of the record and the presentence report ("PSR")
further shows that there is no error in Taylor's sentence based
on the calculation of drug weight because the PSR attributed a
lesser amount of drugs to Taylor than it might have based on the
pure weight of the methamphetamine. Finally, the district court
did not clearly err by denying Taylor a mitigating role
adjustment because Taylor's conduct was not peripheral to the
advancement of the illicit activity. See United States v.
No. 04-60491
-3-
Tremelling, 43 F.3d 148, 153 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v.
Harris, 932 F.2d 1529, 1539 (5th Cir. 1991).
The district court's judgment is AFFIRMED.