UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
No. 96-4232
VICTOR WILLIAM HARGRAVE, a/k/a
David Lee Hargrave,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Salisbury.
James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-95-186)
Submitted: May 1, 1997
Decided: May 12, 1997
Before WIDENER and MURNAGHAN, Circuit Judges, and
PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.
_________________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
Daniel S. Johnson, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Robert M. Hamilton,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
_________________________________________________________________
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Victor William Hargrave pled guilty to conspiracy to possess more
than 50 grams of crack cocaine with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.
§ 846 (1994), and was sentenced to 360 months imprisonment. He
appeals his sentence, arguing that the district court clearly erred in
finding that he obstructed justice, USSG § 3C1.1,1 that he did not
accept responsibility, USSG § 3E1.1, that he was an organizer or
supervisor, USSG § 3B1.1(c), and that cash seized from a codefen-
dant's safe was attributable to him as relevant conduct, USSG
§ 1B1.3, and properly converted to its crack equivalent. We affirm.
We review the district court's factual determinations related to sen-
tencing for clear error. United States v. Daughtrey, 874 F.2d 213, 217
(4th Cir. 1989). When the court decided to accept the probation offi-
cer's recommendations over Hargrave's objection, it had before it the
following information. In September 1994, police in Lexington, North
Carolina, attempted the controlled delivery of a package containing
crack and marijuana which had been mailed to Cindy Graham from
Ontario, California. Graham was not home, but came to the post
office the next day to pick up the package accompanied by Hargrave.
When Hargrave noticed that police were present, Hargrave and Gra-
ham left. Graham later told police that she had previously received a
package of crack from Ontario, California, for Hargrave. She had also
wired a total of $13,944.55 to Kevin Puckett in Ontario, California,
at Hargrave's direction.
In May 1995, a search warrant was executed at Kevin Puckett's
Lexington residence after a confidential informant bought crack from
him there. In a safe in his bedroom, police found 25.9 grams of crack
_________________________________________________________________
1 United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (Nov.
1995).
2
and $24,714 in cash. A firearm was also in the room. On June 9,
1995, police attempted to stop Puckett's car in which Hargrave was
a passenger. Both men were suspected of a break-in at a self-storage
unit which was rented by Kecia Puckett (Hargrave's sister and Kevin
Puckett's wife). During the chase which followed, a bag containing
crack was thrown from the vehicle. More crack and $2000 in cash
were found in the vehicle after it was stopped. The next day, a search
warrant was executed at the self-storage unit. Police seized 138.4
grams of crack, $870 in cash and four handguns from the unit. Har-
grave and Kevin Puckett were arrested shortly afterward.
A month later, Kecia Puckett was interviewed by an agent of the
Drug Enforcement Administration and a police detective. She told
them that Hargrave had called her from jail, told her that the crack
found in the storage unit belonged to him and Kevin Puckett, but that
he would not be convicted for it because the unit was not in his name,
and urged her to tell the police that the crack belonged to Kevin
Puckett because he was a lost cause anyway.
Kecia Puckett modified her story at Hargrave's sentencing hearing.
Testifying on Hargrave's behalf, she said he had not asked her to lie.
The federal agent and the police detective testified that she had previ-
ously told them Hargrave did ask her to lie to help him. On these
facts, the district court did not clearly err in finding that Hargrave had
obstructed justice by attempting to unlawfully influence a witness.
USSG § 3C1.1, comment. (n.3(a)).2 In consequence, an adjustment
for acceptance of responsibility was not warranted. Hargrave's is not
an extraordinary case where both adjustments might apply. USSG
§ 3E1.1, comment. (n.4).
Because Hargrave directed Cindy Graham's actions in furtherance
of the conspiracy, the district court did not clearly err in awarding him
a two-level adjustment for having an aggravated role such as a leader
or supervisor. Finally, there was ample evidence that Hargrave and
Kevin Puckett were involved in a joint criminal activity and that the
large amount of cash found with crack in Puckett's safe was part of
that criminal activity. Therefore, the district court properly converted
_________________________________________________________________
2 Hargrave also gave a false Social Security number to the probation
officer.
3
the money to its crack equivalent to more accurately reflect the scale
of the offense. See United States v. Hicks, 948 F.2d 877, 882-83 (4th
Cir. 1991); USSG § 2D1.1, comment. (n.12).
Accordingly, we affirm the sentence. We dispense with oral argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the deci-
sional process.
AFFIRMED
4