Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
United States of America, Appellee, v. Rudolfo Ojeda, Appellant.united States of America, Appellee, v. Dwight Cloud, Appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. - 923 F.2d 95
Submitted Dec. 11, 1990.Decided Jan. 8, 1991
James M. Cremer and Joseph P. Barnett, Aberdeen, S.D., for appellants.
Dennis R. Holmes, Pierre, S.D., for appellee.
Before McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges, and STROM,* District Judge.
PER CURIAM.
Rudolfo Ojeda and Dwight Cloud appeal from drug related sentences imposed by the district court under the sentencing guidelines. The district court found Ojeda acted as an organizer or leader and Cloud as a manager or supervisor. The district court then increased Ojeda's offense level by four and increased Cloud's offense level by three. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 3B1.1. Ojeda and Cloud contend the record contains insufficient evidence to support the district court's findings.
Having reviewed the record, we do not believe the district court's findings are clearly erroneous. See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3742(e) (1988); United States v. Pierce, 907 F.2d 56, 56 (8th Cir.1990) (per curiam). Because there is ample evidence of Ojeda's and Cloud's participatory roles apart from the quantities of cocaine involved, we also reject Ojeda's and Cloud's arguments that they were subjected to double counting in sentencing. See United States v. Fuller, 897 F.2d 1217, 1221-22 (1st Cir.1990).
Accordingly, we affirm Ojeda's and Cloud's sentences. See 8th Cir.R. 47B.