United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 12, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-50702
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
HECTOR ZEUS SOTO-MEJIA
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:03-CR-1051-3-PRM
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Hector Zeus Soto-Mejia (Soto) appeals his conviction and
sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute
1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana (count one), possession with
intent to distribute a quantity of marijuana (count two), and
possession with intent to distribute 1,000 kilograms or more of
marijuana (count five).
Soto argues that the district court clearly erred in
reducing his offense level by two levels for his minor
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-50702
-2-
participation in the offenses, rather than by four levels for his
minimal participation in the offenses. He contends that the
factual basis of his plea indicated that his only participation
in the vast drug enterprise was his loading of marijuana from a
warehouse into a tractor-trailer on two occasions, that he had
little knowledge or understanding of the scope and structure of
the enterprise, and that others who were higher up in the
conspiracy received sentences that were lower than or equal to
his sentence.
The fact that Soto loaded and unloaded boxes of marijuana to
and from tractor-trailers and a warehouse on three separate
occasions, the fact that Soto accompanied a marijuana shipment
after it was loaded on one of those occasions, and the fact that
two tractor-trailers that were loaded at the warehouse, one of
which Soto loaded, contained thousands of pounds of marijuana
indicate that Soto in fact knew the scope and structure of the
enterprise. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.4); United States
v. Becerra, 155 F.3d 740, 757 (5th Cir. 1998). Furthermore, the
district court was not required to find, based solely on Soto’s
bare assertion that he did not know of the scope or structure of
the enterprise, that such a role adjustment was warranted. See
U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2, comment. (n.3(C)). Accordingly, the district
court did not clearly err in determining that Soto was not
entitled to a minimal-role downward adjustment.
No. 04-50702
-3-
Soto’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. We REMAND to
the district court for correction of the judgment pursuant to
FED. R. CRIM. P. 36 to reflect that Soto was convicted under count
two of possession with intent to distribute “a quantity” of
marijuana, rather than possession with intent to distribute
“>1000 kgs” of marijuana.