Perez-Medina

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Perez-Medina appeals his 52-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to one count of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute it, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). 1 We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

We review for clear error the factual findings underlying a district court’s determination of what constitutes relevant conduct for sentencing purposes. United States v. Whitecotton, 142 F.3d 1194, 1197 (9th Cir.1998). The quantity of drugs used to determine a sentence must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence. Id.

Perez-Medina contends that the district court erred by basing its sentencing decision on an overly inclusive determination of relevant conduct. According to Perez-Medina, the district court should have rested its determination of his base offense level solely on the quantity of cocaine involved in the count to which he pled guilty. Instead, he contends, the district court improperly considered as relevant conduct (1) a distribution count against him to which he did not plead guilty, and (2) a distribution count solely against his co-defendant.

*619 In imposing a sentence, a…