United States v. Ha T. T. Nguyen

111 F. App'x 439
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 27, 2004
Docket03-3784
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 F. App'x 439 (United States v. Ha T. T. Nguyen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth 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. Ha T. T. Nguyen, 111 F. App'x 439 (8th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ha. T.T. Nguyen appeals the sentence the district court * imposed after Nguyen pleaded guilty to conspiring to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, and a related forfeiture count. At sentencing, the district court admitted into evidence over Nguyen’s objection the certified state records of three earlier uncounseled misdemeanor convictions, and the transcripts of the testimony of two witnesses who testified at the trial of co-defendant Adil Gasim Al-Dabbi. Based on these exhibits, the court applied 3 criminal history points to Nguyen and imposed a 3-level role enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(b). We affirm.

On appeal, Nguyen contends the district court abused its discretion by admitting into evidence and relying on the certified state records of conviction, and alternatively the court erroneously assigned criminal history points for uncounseled misdemeanor convictions. We find the court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the records, see United States v. *441 Abanatha, 999 F.2d 1246, 1250-51 (8th Cir.1993), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1035, 114 S.Ct. 1549, 128 L.Ed.2d 199 (1994), or by deciding Nguyen was the individual convicted of the earlier crimes, as her first and last names were present on each record and she never denied she was the person convicted of the crimes, cf. United States v. Roach, 164 F.3d 403, 414 (8th Cir.1998), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 845, 120 S.Ct. 117, 145 L.Ed.2d 99 (1999). We also find the court properly assigned criminal history points for Nguyen’s earlier uncounselled misdemeanor convictions. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.2, comment, (backg’d.).

Nguyen also contends the district court committed clear error in imposing the role enhancement under section 3Bl.l(b). We find the court did not commit error because the transcribed witness testimony revealed that at least five individuals participated in the conspiracy, Nguyen played a significant role in the drug transactions, and at least one of the participants in the conspiracy was Nguyen’s subordinate. See U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.1(b); United States v. Francis, 367 F.3d 805, 824-25 (8th Cir.2004); United States v. Zimmer, 299 F.3d 710, 723 (8th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1146, 123 S.Ct. 952, 154 L.Ed.2d 848 (2003).

We affirm the judgment of the district court.

*

The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.

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

Related

State v. Lawyer
244 P.3d 1256 (Idaho Court of Appeals, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 F. App'x 439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-ha-t-t-nguyen-ca8-2004.