United States v. Jesus Jimenez
690 F. App'x 282
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- Jesus Jimenez pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute >=50 grams of methamphetamine and was sentenced to 300 months imprisonment and five years supervised release.
- The Presentence Report applied U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5), a two-level enhancement for methamphetamine importation, increasing his offense level to 41.
- Jimenez objected to the importation enhancement and argued information from a cooperation agreement was improperly used (raising U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8 confidentiality concerns).
- He also argued the court erred by applying the enhancement without evidence he knew the drugs were imported.
- The Government showed that even if the two-level enhancement were removed (offense level 39), Jimenez’s criminal-history category IV would still yield an advisory Guidelines range of 360–480 months.
- The Fifth Circuit reviewed guideline interpretation de novo and factual findings for clear error, and considered whether any Guidelines error was harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of § 2D1.1(b)(5) importation enhancement | Jimenez: enhancement incorrectly applied (factual/legal error) | Government: enhancement supported by record | Even if enhancement were wrong, its removal would not change Guidelines range; any error was harmless — affirmed |
| Use of cooperation information (U.S.S.G. § 1B1.8) | Jimenez: court failed to rule that coop-derived information was improperly used to support enhancement | Government: record supports enhancement regardless | Court need not resolve because any error is harmless |
| Knowledge requirement for importation enhancement | Jimenez: no evidence he knew meth was imported, so enhancement improper | Government: argument foreclosed by precedent or record supports enhancement | Court did not reach merits because harmlessness disposes of appeal |
| Harmless-error burden | Jimenez: error in Guidelines calculation would affect sentence | Government: bears burden to prove harmlessness; shows same advisory range survives without enhancement | Government met its burden; alleged Guideline error harmless; judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Nieto v. United States, 721 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 2013) (standard: de novo review of guideline interpretation; clear-error for factual findings)
- Lopez-Urbina v. United States, 434 F.3d 750 (5th Cir. 2005) (harmless error in Guidelines calculations requires showing the error did not affect the sentence selection)
- Chon v. United States, 713 F.3d 812 (5th Cir. 2013) (Guidelines calculation error is harmless if it does not affect the Guidelines range)
- Casas v. United States, [citation="591 F. App'x 258"] (5th Cir. 2015) (same: harmlessness analysis for Guidelines errors)
- Foulks v. United States, 747 F.3d 914 (5th Cir. 2014) (controlling precedent regarding knowledge requirement argument)