United States v. Derek Miller

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Derek Miller

598 F. App'x 284

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedMarch 19, 2015

Docket14-60464

StatusUnpublished

This text of 598 F. App'x 284 (United States v. Derek Miller) 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. Derek Miller, 598 F. App'x 284 (5th Cir. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Derek Miller appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and money laundering. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 160 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release on each count. He contends that the district court erred by applying a two-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(l) for possession of a firearm.

We review the district court’s factual finding that § 201.1(b)(1) applies for clear error. See United States v. King, 773 F.3d 48, 52 (5th Cir.2014). The enhancement was based on the firearm found with $20,000 in cash in a dresser drawer in a bedroom in Miller’s mother’s house. Regardless of whether the $20,000 was intended to be used in a subsequent drug transaction, a preponderance of the evidence plausibly established a temporal and spatial relationship between the firearm, Miller’s drug dealing, and Miller. See id. at 52-53. The firearm was found in the same dresser drawer as $20,000 in drug proceeds and in the same house where Miller admitted that he gave drug proceeds to his sister to store elsewhere and packaged $66,000 in drug proceeds to be used in a subsequent drug transaction. This undisputed evidence supported the district court’s implicit inference that Miller possessed the firearm to protect himself and his drug proceeds. See United States v. Vasquez, 161 F.3d 909, 912-13 (5th Cir.1998). The district court also did not clearly err in finding that Miller did not meet his burden of showing that it was clearly improbable that the firearm was related to his drug dealing. See King, 773 F.3d at 52-53.

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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

PER CURIAM: *

Derek Miller appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and money laundering. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 160 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release on each count. He contends that the district court erred by applying a two-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2Dl.l(b)(l) for possession of a firearm.

We review the district court’s factual finding that § 201.1(b)(1) applies for clear error. See United States v. King, 773 F.3d 48, 52 (5th Cir.2014). The enhancement was based on the firearm found with $20,000 in cash in a dresser drawer in a bedroom in Miller’s mother’s house. Regardless of whether the $20,000 was intended to be used in a subsequent drug transaction, a preponderance of the evidence plausibly established a temporal and spatial relationship between the firearm, Miller’s drug dealing, and Miller. See id. at 52-53. The firearm was found in the same dresser drawer as $20,000 in drug proceeds and in the same house where Miller admitted that he gave drug proceeds to his sister to store elsewhere and packaged $66,000 in drug proceeds to be used in a subsequent drug transaction. This undisputed evidence supported the district court’s implicit inference that Miller possessed the firearm to protect himself and his drug proceeds. See United States v. Vasquez, 161 F.3d 909, 912-13 (5th Cir.1998). The district court also did not clearly err in finding that Miller did not meet his burden of showing that it was clearly improbable that the firearm was related to his drug dealing. See King, 773 F.3d at 52-53.

The district court’s judgment is 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

598 F. App'x 284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-derek-miller-ca5-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack