United States v. Farias

112 F. App'x 374
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedNovember 16, 2004
Docket04-50348
StatusUnpublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 112 F. App'x 374 (United States v. Farias) 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. Farias, 112 F. App'x 374 (5th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Joshua Kane Farias appeals his sentence, following his guilty plea convictions for conspiracy to possess and possession with intent to distribute 50 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 846. He contends the district court erred in imposing a two-level enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.4 for using his two minor children to avoid detection of his offenses.

The district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines is reviewed de novo; its factual findings for clear error. E.g., United States v. Ocana, 204 F.3d 585, 588 (5th Cir.2000). Farias admitted that he was instructed to take his children on drug-smuggling trips to avoid detection by law enforcement, and his children accompanied on two such trips. He failed to provide any other plausible explanation for taking his children with him on those trips. The district court did not clearly err. See United States v. Alarcon, 261 F.3d 416, 423 (5th Cir.2001).

Farias also contends, for the first time on appeal, that the increase of his sentence due to drug quantity was improper under Blakely v. Washington, — U.S. —, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 2537, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), because those facts were not alleged in the indictment and not found beyond a reasonable doubt by the district court or admitted by him. As Farias concedes, this contention is foreclosed by United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d 464, 473 (5th Cir.2004), petition for cert. filed, (U.S. 14 July 2004) (No. 04-5263).

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Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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. Mata
624 F.3d 170 (Fifth Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
112 F. App'x 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-farias-ca5-2004.