United States v. David Zavala, Jr.

406 F. App'x 857
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedDecember 29, 2010
Docket10-20256
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 406 F. App'x 857 (United States v. David Zavala, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. David Zavala, Jr., 406 F. App'x 857 (5th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

David Zavala, Jr., was convicted of one charge of conspiracy to commit robbery and was sentenced to serve 46 months in prison and a three-year term of supervised release. In this appeal, he challenges his sentence, arguing that the district court erred by determining that he constructively possessed a firearm during the offense and imposing a corresponding sentencing adjustment.

When analyzing such challenges, Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007), instructs us to determine whether the sentence imposed is procedurally sound, including whether the calculation of the advisory guidelines range is correct. We review the district court’s interpretation and application of the Sentencing Guidelines de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir.2008).

Our analysis shows no procedural error in connection with Zavala’s sentence. Insofar as he argues that the adjustment was improper because the firearm was possessed by a cooperating individual, this argument is refuted by the record, which shows another individual also possessed it. To the extent he contends that he could not have reasonably foreseen the use of a firearm during the robbery, this assertion is undermined by those portions of the record showing that the conspirators held a meeting and discussed using a firearm to rob an armored truck. Additionally, these parts of the record show that the district court’s conclusion regarding Zavala’s constructive possession of the firearm is plausible and thus is not clearly erroneous. See Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d at 764.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. William Wade
419 F. App'x 538 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
406 F. App'x 857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-david-zavala-jr-ca5-2010.