Professional Documents
Culture Documents
United States v. Alfredo Vergara-Escobar, 4th Cir. (2015)
United States v. Alfredo Vergara-Escobar, 4th Cir. (2015)
United States v. Alfredo Vergara-Escobar, 4th Cir. (2015)
No. 14-4682
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Harrisonburg.
Michael F. Urbanski,
District Judge. (5:13-cr-00012-MFU-1)
Submitted:
Before KEENAN
Circuit Judge.
and
DIAZ,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
and
DAVIS,
Senior
PER CURIAM:
A jury convicted Alfredo Vergara-Escobar of conspiracy to
distribute methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. 846 (2012), and three
counts of distribution of methamphetamine, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1)
(2012).
The
Guidelines
range
Vergara-Escobar
court
to
sentenced
292
argues
Vergara-Escobar
months
that
the
within
imprisonment.
district
On
court
the
appeal,
violated
his
proven
by
reasonable
doubt.
He
further
contests
the
We
affirm.
We review a sentence for reasonableness under a deferential
abuse-of-discretion standard.
38, 41, 51 (2007).
Id. at 51.
court
properly
range
and
gave
appropriate
considered
arguments
calculated
the
18
presented
the
parties
sentence,
the
we
an
analyze
U.S.C.
by
defendants
the
advisory
opportunity
whether
3553(a)
parties,
to
the
(2012)
selected
Guidelines
argue
for
district
factors
a
an
court
and
any
sentence
not
significant
reasonableness
procedural
of
the
error,
sentence,
within
presumptively
properly
we
review
tak[ing]
into
substantive
account
the
calculated
substantively
the
Guidelines
reasonable.
Any
range
United
is
States v.
Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct.
421 (2014).
Relying
(2013),
on
Alleyne
Vergara-Escobar
v.
United
first
States,
argues
that
133
the
S.
Ct.
district
2151
court
statutory
of
minimum
prior
sentence
conviction.
based
on
Contrary
judicial
to
Vergara-
States
v.
Higgs,
353
F.3d
281,
324
(4th
Cir.
See
2003)
Alleyne, 133
224
(1998)).
Almendarez-Torres
remains
good
law,
and
[this Court] may not disregard it unless and until the Supreme
Court holds to the contrary.
F.3d
115,
(2015).
124
(4th Cir.
2014),
cert.
denied,
135
S. Ct.
942
supervisor
in
Guidelines
Manual
imposition
of
the
offense
3B1.1(b)
role
pursuant
(2013).
adjustment
is
to
The
U.S.
Sentencing
district
factual
courts
determination
and
the
criminal
activity
involved
five
or
USSG 3B1.1(b).
more
To
USSG 3B1.1,
participants
or
exercised
management
responsibility.
United States v. Slade, 631 F.3d 185, 190 (4th Cir. 2011).
least,
there
were
five
participants,
At the
Vergara-Escobar
with
contentions
are
oral
argument
adequately
because
presented
in
the
the
facts
We
and
legal
materials
before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED