Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Aida Armendariz

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
April 4, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-51102
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
AIDA ARMENDARIZ
Defendant - Appellant
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-02-CR-796-ALL-PRM
- - - - - - - - - -
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Aida Armendariz appeals her guilty-plea conviction for
importation of 50 kilograms or more of marijuana and possession
with the intent to distribute that same amount. She argues that
the district court clearly erred in refusing to award a two-level
reduction in her guideline range on the basis that she was a
minor participant in the offense. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1.
Armendariz also avers that the district court failed to make

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-51102
-2-
sufficient factual findings with regard to this issue so as to
allow this court to properly review the issue.
The district court was not required to state its reasons for
denying the reduction because it expressly adopted the findings
and conclusions of the presentence report. See United States
v. Gallardo-Trapero, 185 F.3d 307, 323-24 (5th Cir. 1999).
Because Armendariz failed to prove her minor role by a
preponderance of the evidence, the district court did not clearly
err by denying the adjustment. See United States v. Brown, 54
F.3d 234, 241 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. Edwards, 65 F.3d
430, 432 (5th Cir. 1995). It is clear from the record that
Armendariz was not substantially less culpable than the average
participant in the offense and that her role was not peripheral
to the advancement of the illicit activity. See Brown, 54 F.3d
241; United States v. Miranda, 248 F.3d 434, 446-47 (5th Cir.
2001).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --