USA v. Jorge Garcia, No. 19-41035 (5th Cir. 2020)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 19-41035 Document: 00515452479 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/15/2020 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 19-41035 Summary Calendar FILED June 15, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee v. JORGE LUIS GARCIA, Defendant - Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:18-CR-1832-1 Before BARKSDALE, HAYNES, and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jorge Luis Garcia pleaded guilty to possession, with intent to distribute, approximately 115 kilograms of marihuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and was sentenced to, inter alia, 42 months’ imprisonment, six months to run consecutively to the sentence imposed in another drug case. He contends the district court erred by applying Sentencing Guideline § 3C1.2’s enhancement, applicable where “defendant recklessly created a substantial Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.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: 19-41035 Document: 00515452479 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/15/2020 No. 19-41035 risk of death or serious bodily injury to another person in the course of fleeing from a law enforcement officer”. U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2. Garcia contends, primarily, that the “substantial risk” element was lacking. Although post-Booker, the Guidelines are advisory only, the district court must avoid significant procedural error, such as improperly calculating the Guidelines sentencing range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 46, 51 (2007). If no such procedural error exists, a properly preserved objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for substantive reasonableness under an abuseof-discretion standard. Id. at 51; United States v. Delgado-Martinez, 564 F.3d 750, 751–53 (5th Cir. 2009). In that respect, for issues preserved in district court, its application of the Guidelines is reviewed de novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. E.g., United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008). The decision to apply Guideline § 3C1.2 is reviewed for clear error and will be upheld if plausible in the light of the record as a whole. United States v. Gould, 529 F.3d 274, 276 (5th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted). There was no clear error. Among other things, Garcia attempted to evade law enforcement by driving 50 miles per hour in a 30 mile-per-hour zone in evening traffic for two miles; committed a traffic violation by failing to yield at an intersection; and traveled for one-block on the shoulder of the road while passing other vehicles. See id. 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.