Michael Pena appeals his 97-month sentence imposed following a jury trial conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 100 kilograms of marijuana. Pena argues that the district court prevented him from arguing that he was entitled to a safety-valve adjustment and a minor-role adjustment. This argument is factually incorrect because the district court allowed him to make these arguments at the sentencing hearing. In any event, Pena has not shown that, given his admitted lies in court, the denials of the safety-valve adjustment and minor-role adjustment were clearly erroneous. See United States v. Davis, 76 F.3d 82, 84 (5th Cir. 1996). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.