United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 3, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 05-51289
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JAMIE BERNARD GRIMSLEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 3:05-CR-511-ALL
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jamie Bernard Grimsley appeals the 60-month sentence imposed
upon his guilty-plea conviction for possession with intent to
distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana. See 21 U.S.C.
§ 841. He argues that he received two criminal history points
based on the district court’s erroneous finding that he was on
probation for traffic offenses at the time that he committed the
instant offense. He argues that but for those two points, he
would have been eligible for a two-level “safety valve” decrease
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 05-51289
-2-
pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(7), which would have resulted in
a lesser sentence.
In rejecting Grimsley’s argument, the district court relied
on the state court judgment and probation violator’s warrant for
three separate case numbers, all of which involved Grimsley’s
convictions of violations of various traffic laws. The judgment
set forth one sentence for all three case numbers, multiple fines
that correlated with the respective case numbers, and one
outstanding amount owed on those fines. Although the probation
violator’s warrant bore the number of a case that was not scored
in the criminal history section of the presentence report, the
warrant included a list of the offenses charged in the case that
was scored as well as a notation of the outstanding fine owed on
all three cases.
The documents relied on by the district court had sufficient
indicia of reliability to support their probable accuracy. See
United States v. Angeles-Mendoza, 407 F.3d 742, 749-50 (5th Cir.
2005). The district court’s finding that the warrant related to
all three cases was plausible in light of the record as a whole.
Id. at 750. Grimsley has not shown that the district court’s
factual findings and inferences therefrom were clearly erroneous.
See Angeles-Mendoza, 407 F.3d at 750; United States v. Caldwell,
448 F.3d 287, 290 (5th Cir. 2006).
AFFIRMED.