USA v. Angelita Ramirez, No. 10-50292 (5th Cir. 2010)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 10-50292 Document: 00511300075 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/19/2010 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED No. 10-50292 Summary Calendar November 19, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. ANGELITA MICHELLE RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:09-CR-176-2 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Angelita Michelle Ramirez pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. She appeals the 36-month sentence, arguing that the district court should have imposed a shorter sentence under the safety-valve sentencing guideline, U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f); United States v. Lopez, 264 F.3d 527, 529-30 (5th Cir. 2001). We will uphold the court s * 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR .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. Case: 10-50292 Document: 00511300075 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/19/2010 No. 10-50292 decision as long as it is not clearly erroneous. United States v. McCrimmon, 443 F.3d 454, 457 (5th Cir. 2006). A defendant seeking relief under the safety valve must show, among other things, that she has truthfully provided the Government with all information and evidence related to the offense. § 3553(f)(5); § 5C1.2(a)(5); United States v. Flanagan, 80 F.3d 143, 146-47 (5th Cir. 1996). The case agent testified at sentencing regarding specific information that Ramirez could have provided but did not. The court s determination that Ramirez did not completely debrief is therefore plausible in light of the entire record. See United States v. Powers, 168 F.3d 741, 753 (5th Cir. 1999). The denial of the safety-valve adjustment was not clearly erroneous. See Powers, 168 F.3d at 753. AFFIRMED. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.