United States v. Gonsales-Perez
This text of United States v. Gonsales-Perez (United States v. Gonsales-Perez) 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.
Opinion
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT June 24, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41310 Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
BERNARDO GONSALES-PEREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-02-CR-380-3 --------------------
Before DeMOSS, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Bernardo Gonsales-Perez pleaded guilty to transporting
aliens within the United States and was sentenced to 30 months
of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. On
appeal, he argues that the district court erred by increasing
his offense level by six pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(2)(B)
because his offense involved transporting 31 aliens and by two
pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.1(b)(5) because the offense involved
the intentional or reckless creation of substantial risk of death
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. No. 02-41310 -2-
or serious bodily injury because of the conditions in which the
aliens were transported in the trucks. The district court’s
application of the sentencing guidelines is reviewed de novo,
while its findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. United
States v. Harrington, 82 F.3d 83, 86 (5th Cir. 1996). Gonsales-
Perez has not shown that information that the district court
relied on in sentencing him was materially untrue. United States
v. Puig-Infante, 19 F.3d 929, 943 (5th Cir. 1994). Accordingly,
he has not shown that the district court erred in sentencing him
under the guidelines. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(1)(B) (relevant
conduct); United States v. Cuyler, 298 F.3d 387, 389 (5th Cir.
2002) (reckless endangerment).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
United States v. Gonsales-Perez, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gonsales-perez-ca5-2003.