United States v. Hernandez

United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit

No. 19-10756

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Juan Ernesto Hernandez,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:19-CR-41-1

Before Davis, Stewart, and Dennis, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
Juan Ernesto Hernandez pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to
possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a mixture or substance
containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. Because Hernandez
substantially assisted the Government, the district court sentenced him to a
below-guidelines sentence of 300 months in prison. Hernandez nevertheless

*
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not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in
5
TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
September 9, 2020

Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Case: 19-10756 Document: 00515556984 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2020

No. 19-10756
2
challenges the district court’s application of sentencing enhancements under
U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b) based on his role as a manager or supervisor in the
conspiracy and U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(12) because he maintained a premises
for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or storing a controlled
substance.
Because Hernandez objected to the enhancements in the district
court, we review the district court’s interpretation and application of the
Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear error. See United States
v. Zuniga, 720 F.3d 587, 590 (5th Cir. 2013). Whether a defendant exercised
an aggravating role and maintained a drug premises are findings of fact.
United States v. Guzman-Reyes, 853 F.3d 260, 263, 265 (5th Cir. 2017). When
making factual findings for sentencing purposes, a district court may consider
any relevant information that has a “sufficient indicia of reliability to support
its probable accuracy.” U.S.S.G. § 6A1.3(a), p.s.; Zuniga, 720 F.3d at 590-
91.
The § 3B1.1(b) role enhancement applies if the defendant was a
manager or supervisor and “the criminal activity involved five or more
participants or was otherwise extensive.” § 3B1.1(b); see United States v.
Delgado, 672 F.3d 320, 345 (5th Cir. 2012) (en banc); § 3B1.1, comment (n.2).
The § 2D1.1(b)(12) enhancement applies if the defendant maintained a
premises for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, or storing controlled
substances. § 2D1.1(b)(12), comment. (n.17); see Guzman-Reyes, 853 F.3d at
264.
Hernandez presented no evidence to rebut the factual assertions in the
adopted presentence report (PSR) that he exercised control over at least one
participant in the criminal activity, that he managed the property, assets, and
activities of the drug trafficking organization, and that a principal purpose of
his house was drug storage and distribution. In light of the unrebutted PSR,
Case: 19-10756 Document: 00515556984 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/09/2020

No. 19-10756
3
the district court’s application of the enhancements was not clearly
erroneous. See Guzman-Reyes, 853 F.3d at 263-66; Zuniga, 720 F.3d at 590-
92.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Case: 19-10756 Document: 00515556984 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/09/2020