[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FILED
-------------------------------------------U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 05-12994 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
AUGUST 10, 2006
Non-Argument Calendar
-------------------------------------------- THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
D.C. Docket No. 02-00586-CR-12-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
Cross-Appellant,
versus
CARLOS GARZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Cross-Appellee.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
----------------------------------------------------------------
(August 10, 2006)
Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, ANDERSON and BIRCH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Carlos Garza appeals his 188-month sentence for conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute at least 5 kilograms of cocaine hydrochloride and at least 500
grams of a mixture containing methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§
841(b)(1)(A)(ii), (viii); and 846. No reversible error has been shown; we affirm.
Garza argues that the district court clearly erred in determining that he was
responsible for 80 to 100 kilograms of cocaine. He contends that trial testimony
by Charles Anthony Brown about Garza’s drug transactions with Brown was too
ambiguous and contradictory for the district court to determine the quantity of
cocaine attributable to Garza. “We review a district court’s determination of the
quantity of drugs used to establish a base offense level for sentencing purposes
under the clearly erroneous standard.” United States v. Simpson, 228 F.3d 1294,
1298 (11th Cir. 2000). In reviewing the district court’s factual findings at
sentencing, “[w]e accord great deference to the district court’s credibility
determinations.” United States v. Gregg, 179 F.3d 1312, 1316 (11th Cir. 1999).
“[T]he base offense level for a possession or a conspiracy drug offense is
ordinarily calculated by determining the quantity of drugs attributable to a
defendant.” United States v. Rodriguez, 398 F.3d 1291, 1296 (11th Cir. 2005)
(citing U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(a)). “Where there is no drug seizure or the amount
seized does not reflect the scale of the offense, the court shall approximate the
quantity of the controlled substance.” U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1 cmt. n.12. For offenses
2
involving at least 50 kilograms but less than 150 kilograms of cocaine, the base
offense level is 36. U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(2).
In this case, the district court’s drug quantity calculation was based in large
part on Brown’s trial testimony. The district court concluded that Brown’s
testimony was credible, a determination that is entitled to great deference on
appeal. See Gregg, 179 F.3d at 1316. Because Brown’s testimony established that
Garza was responsible for 80 to 100 kilograms of cocaine, the district court did not
clearly err in determining that Garza’s base offense level was 36. See U.S.S.G. §
2D1.1(c)(2).
AFFIRMED.
3