United States v. Sherman
This text of United States v. Sherman (United States v. Sherman) 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
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-60246 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
THOMAS SHERMAN,
Defendant-Appellant.
-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi USDC No. 2:98-CR-90-ALL-D-B -------------------- January 20, 2000
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Defendant-Appellant Thomas Sherman (“Sherman”) was sentenced
to the mandatory minimum sentence of 120 months imprisonment
following a guilty-plea conviction for manufacturing
methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841. Sherman raises
a number of points of error regarding his sentence. We address
his contention that he was not a “leader or organizer” first, as
it is dispositive. If Sherman was a “leader or organizer,” the
district court may not depart from the statutory minimum
sentence, regardless of the sentence suggested by the guidelines.
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. See United States v. Mankins, 135 F.3d 946, 950 (5th Cir. 1998);
U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. None of Sherman’s other objections to the
sentence imposed serves to render the statutory minimum sentence
inapplicable.
We review the district court’s determination that a
defendant is a leader or organizer for clear error. See United
States v. Ronning, 47 F.3d 710, 711 (5th Cir. 1995). The court
may consider any relevant evidence without regard to its
admissibility under evidentiary rules if it possesses sufficient
indicia of reliability. U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a). A presentence
report (“PSR”) “generally bears sufficient indicia of
reliability” and may be considered as evidence by a trial judge
in making factual determinations required by the guidelines.
United States v. Alfaro, 919 F.2d 962, 966 (5th Cir. 1992).
The PSR and the testimony of Robert Jordan, one of Sherman’s
accomplices, support the district court’s finding that Sherman
was in a leadership position with respect to the methamphetamine
operation. The district court apparently chose to believe
Jordan’s testimony regarding Sherman’s role and we accord
deference to that credibility determination. See United States
v. Powers, 168 F.3d 741, 752-53 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, -- U.S.
–-, 120 S.Ct. 360 (1999). As this determination renders
Sherman’s other objections moot, we decline to address them. See
Mankins, 135 F.3d at 950.
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. Sherman, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-sherman-ca5-2000.