Texas Case Summaries
Federal Enforcement »

United States v. Willis — Fifth Circuit affirmed cocaine sentence and drug-quantity calculation

Unreported / Non-Citable

Case
United States of America v. Dewayne Deshae Willis
Court
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Judge
Jones; Ho
Date Decided
August 10, 2026
Docket No.
25-11061
Topics
Criminal Sentencing, Drug Quantity, Plain-Error Review

Background

Dewayne Deshae Willis pleaded guilty to possessing with intent to distribute a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas sentenced him to 136 months in prison.

On appeal, Willis challenged the quantity of drugs attributed to him in calculating his base offense level. He argued that statements from three confidential sources—identified as CS 2, CS 3, and CS 4—were unreliable and that the calculation based on CS 4’s statement was “patently incorrect.”

The Court’s Holding

In an unpublished per curiam opinion, the Fifth Circuit affirmed Willis’s sentence. The court held that Willis had not shown reversible plain error in the district court’s drug-quantity calculation.

The court did not separately analyze the reliability of each confidential source or explain the underlying quantity calculation. Applying plain-error review, it concluded that Willis’s arguments did not establish grounds for reversal.

Key Takeaways

  • The Fifth Circuit affirmed Willis’s 136-month sentence for his cocaine-distribution offense.
  • Willis failed to demonstrate reversible plain error in the drug quantity used to calculate his base offense level.
  • The court rejected the sentencing challenge without separately addressing each confidential source’s reliability in the written opinion.

Why It Matters

The decision illustrates the difficulty of overturning a drug-quantity finding under plain-error review. A defendant must do more than dispute the reliability or accuracy of information used at sentencing; the asserted problem must satisfy the demanding requirements for reversible plain error.

Because the opinion is unpublished and provides only a brief disposition, its significance lies primarily in its application of that review standard to Willis’s sentencing challenge rather than in any extended analysis of confidential-source evidence.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top