United States v. Southerland

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 11, 2003
Docket02-41096
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Southerland (United States v. Southerland) 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. Southerland, (5th Cir. 2003).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 11, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 02-41096 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARIA DELOURDES SOUTHERLAND,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-01-CR-591-2 --------------------

Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Maria De Lourdes Southerland (Southerland) appeals the 31-

month sentence she received following her guilty-plea conviction

for possession of more than 500 grams of cocaine with intent to

distribute. She asserts that the district court erred in

assessing a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c) based

upon her role in the offense. She has not established that the

district court clearly erred in imposing the enhancement. See

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. 02-41096 -2-

United States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 878 (5th Cir. 1998).

This portion of the judgment is AFFIRMED.

Southerland also contends that the district court erred in

denying her motion for a downward departure based upon aberrant

behavior. Because Southerland was convicted of a “serious drug

trafficking offense,” she was not entitled to such a departure.

See U.S.S.G. § 5K2.20 & comment. (n.1). The district court

therefore was not mistaken in its belief that it lacked authority

to depart. See United States v. DiMarco, 46 F.3d 476, 477 (5th

Cir. 1995). Because this court lacks jurisdiction to review the

district court’s refusal to depart downward, this portion of the

appeal is DISMISSED.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART.

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

Related

United States v. Posada-Rios
158 F.3d 832 (Fifth Circuit, 1998)
United States v. Salvador Dimarco
46 F.3d 476 (Fifth Circuit, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Southerland, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-southerland-ca5-2003.