United States v. Sidney

No. 99-20489
-1-
* 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20489
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ERIC FITZGERALD SIDNEY,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the ern District of
USDC No. H-98-CR-447-1
--------------------
February 16, 2000
Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Eric Fitzgerald Sidney appeals his sentence for possession
of cocaine base with intent to distribute, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(iii). Sidney contends that the
district court clearly erred in assessing a two-level increase to
his offense level for possession of a firearm under U.S.S.G.
§ 2D1.1(b)(1).
We have reviewed the record and the briefs submitted by the
parties and find that the district court’s finding that Sidney
possessed a firearm in connection with his drug-trafficking

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 99-20489
-2-
offense was supported by a preponderance of the evidence and was
not clearly erroneous. United States v. Vasquez, 161 F.3d 909,
912 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Mitchell, 31 F.3d 271, 279
(5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Menesses, 962 F.2d 420, 429
(5th Cir. 1992).
Sidney also argues, for issue preservation purposes only,
that the district court erred in accepting the PSR’s assessment
of drugs attributable to him. In particular, he contends that
the district court abused its discretion in relying upon the
PSR’s allegations of additional drug transactions without
requiring the Government to offer evidence that Sidney actually
engaged in these additional deals. Because Sidney concedes that
this issue is foreclosed by this court’s precedent, it is not
addressed here.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --