United States v. Valdez-Bretones ( 1995 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion








    October 16, 1995 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT




    ____________________


    No. 95-1208

    UNITED STATES,
    Appellee,

    v.

    NANCY VALDES-BRETONES,
    Defendant, Appellant.

    ____________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

    [Hon. Jose Antonio Fuste, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
    Lynch, Circuit Judge, _____________
    and Watson,* Senior Judge. ____________
    ____________________

    Benicio Sanchez Rivera, Federal Public Defender, and Laura ________________________ _____
    Maldonado Rodriguez, Assistant Federal Public Defender, on brief for ___________________
    appellant.
    Guillermo Gil, United States Attorney, Nelson Perez-Sosa, ______________ ___________________
    Assistant United States Attorney, and Jose A. Quiles-Espinosa, Senior _______________________
    Litigation Counsel, on brief for appellee.

    ____________________


    ____________________

    ________________
    *Senior Judge, U.S. Court of International Trade, sitting by
    designation.
















































































    Per Curiam. Appellant Nancy Valdes-Bretones, ___________

    having pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to

    distribute, 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1),1 challenges the district

    court's denial of a downward adjustment in her offense level

    due to her alleged "minor participant" status. See U.S.S.G. ___

    3B1.2. We affirm.

    I.

    We recount only those facts necessary to a basic

    understanding of the issue on appeal.2 Additional facts

    will be incorporated as necessary.

    After a trip to Aruba, appellant returned to Puerto

    Rico on the morning of July 5, 1994, aboard an American

    Airlines flight. She wore an American Eagle uniform.

    American Airlines security personnel observed her approach

    from the aircrew elevator area. She told them that she was

    leaving later that day to go to New York and asked if she

    could leave a suitcase with them until then, when either she

    or her cousin would pick it up prior to boarding their

    connecting flight.




    ____________________

    1. Appellant was charged with violating 21 U.S.C. 841
    (a)(1) and 21 U.S.C. 952(a). Pursuant to the plea
    agreement, the latter charge was dropped.

    2. Since this conviction resulted from a guilty plea, we
    draw the facts from the uncontested portions of the
    presentence report ("PSR") and the transcript of the hearing.
    U.S. v. Dietz, 950 F.2d 50, 51 (1st Cir. 1991). _____________

    -2-













    The security personnel X-rayed the suitcase,

    observed what they believed to be narcotics, and notified the

    U.S. Customs service. A K-9 dog indicated the presence of

    narcotics. Search of the bag revealed 9.85 kilograms of

    cocaine,3 later determined to be 93% pure, and $8,390.00 in

    U.S. currency.

    Later that afternoon, appellant boarded an airplane

    for Newark. She was detained on board by a Customs agent.

    She was questioned and ultimately arrested. At the time of

    her arrest she was not wearing the American Eagle uniform.

    She was carrying a cellular phone and $2,896.00 in U.S.

    currency. A subsequent search of her apartment turned up

    $5,000.00 in U.S. currency, and an American Eagle uniform.4

    Based on the quantity and type of drugs involved,

    appellant was given a base offense level of 30. U.S.S.G.

    2D1.1. This was reduced by three levels because of her

    guilty plea and her timely acceptance of responsibility.

    U.S.S.G. 3E1.1. With a total offense level of 27, and a

    criminal history category of I, the guidelines called for 70

    to 87 months of imprisonment, with a fine range of $12,500.00


    ____________________

    3. For purposes of sentencing, the amount of cocaine was
    stipulated at 4.92 kilograms.

    4. Investigation revealed that while appellant had once been
    an American Airlines employee, she had not worked for the
    airline since May, 1993. Prior to that time, she had worked
    with the Wackenhut Security Company at the American Airlines
    terminal and with the U.S. Immigration Service in New York.

    -3-













    to $2,000,000.00 plus supervised release. The court imposed

    a 70 month sentence and a $50.00 "special monetary

    assessment." II.

    The Sentencing Guidelines provide for a decrease of

    two levels when a defendant is a minor participant in

    criminal activity. Application Note 3 to U.S.S.G. 3B1.2

    explains that "a minor participant means any participant who

    is less culpable than most other participants, but whose role

    could not be described as minimal."

    Role-in-the-offense determinations are "innately

    fact specific." U.S. v. Rostoff, 53 F.3d 398, 413 (1st Cir. _______________

    1995). "[O]ur standard of oversight is deferential: ``absent

    mistake of law, we review such determinations only for clear

    error.'" Id. (internal quotation omitted). We will reverse ___

    the district court's decision not to grant a downward

    adjustment "only if the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrates

    that the defendant played a part that makes him substantially

    less culpable than the average participant...." U.S. v. ________

    Brandon, 17 F.3d 409, 460 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. _______ _____ ______

    80 (1994).

    A criminal defendant has the burden of proving an

    entitlement to a downward adjustment. U.S. v. Lopez-Gil, 965 _________________

    F.2d 1124 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 483 (1992). _____ ______

    The question whether a criminal defendant is entitled to a

    downward adjustment is based ultimately on the court's



    -4-













    consideration of the facts of each particular case. U.S.S.G.

    3B1.2, comment. (backg'd.).

    The probation officer observed in his report,

    adopted by the district court, that no role in the offense

    adjustment was warranted because of the lack of

    substantiating evidence to establish a criminal hierarchy.

    In response to appellant's objection that there were other

    people involved and she played only a minor role as a

    courier, the report noted that the facts of this case did not

    reflect that appellant was a typical courier with little

    knowledge and understanding of the nature and scope of the

    criminal activity. A. 3-4. The officer detailed his reasons

    for this conclusion: appellant, who had not for some time

    been an American Eagle employee, nonetheless brought along

    her uniform on a business and pleasure trip to Aruba; once

    the plane returned to Puerto Rico, she separated from the

    people she had traveled with and circumvented several

    inspection points. The officer considered as well the amount

    of drugs involved and the high degree of purity. Id. ___

    Appellant reiterates before this court arguments

    rejected by the district court.5 They are no more

    ____________________

    5. We have reviewed appellant's claim that the district
    court may not ever have seen certain documents purporting to
    show that there was at least one other person involved in the
    smuggling scheme. Assuming that appellant had in fact
    provided certain documents to the probation officer which the
    probation officer neglected to hand to the court at the
    hearing - an assumption not wholly supported by the record -

    -5-













    persuasive here. We have specifically rejected the argument

    that status as a drug courier, without more, entitles a

    defendant to a reduction of the offense level as a minimal or

    minor participant. Lopez-Gil, 965 F.2d at 1131; U.S. v. Paz _________ ___________

    Uribe, 891 F.2d 396, 399 (1st Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 495 _____ _____ ______

    U.S. 951 (1990). See U.S. v. Garcia, 920 F.2d 153, 155 (2d ___ ______________

    Cir. 1990) ("[w]hile in certain cases and on particular

    facts, a district court might conclude that a defendant

    courier was ``substantially less culpable than the average

    participant' and thus make a downward adjustment pursuant to

    3B1.2, this conclusion is by no means mandated. ...

    Couriers are indispensable to the smuggling and delivery of

    drugs and their proceeds.").

    Balanced against appellant's claim that she was

    only a minor part of a larger enterprise is the record

    evidence as found or adopted6 by the district court: the

    ____________________

    we are not convinced that appellant has been harmed. The
    court permitted testimony at the sentencing hearing to the
    effect that defendant had consistently claimed there were
    others involved. A. 38-39. The government indicated that
    defendant, when arrested, alleged that a person in Aruba had
    provided her with the drugs. A. 41. Whether in fact there
    were others involved, the court did not find that appellant
    was substantially less culpable than they. Given the details
    of the scheme, the weight and purity of the cocaine and the
    amount of money involved, the court had ample grounds on
    which to deny appellant a downward adjustment.

    6. Appellant claims that the district court failed to make
    findings in support of its rejection of her role in the
    offense adjustment. We have already observed that the PSR,
    adopted by the district court, sets out sufficient reasons in
    support of the denial of the role in the offense adjustment.

    -6-













    considerable amount of cocaine involved; the cocaine's high

    degree of purity, see U.S.S.G. 2D1.1, comment. (n.9); the ___

    planning involved in the smuggling scheme; and the large

    amount of cash found with the drugs, on appellant's person

    and in her home.

    We have not been shown that the district court's

    failure to grant appellant a downward adjustment was in any

    way erroneous. On this record, oral argument will not

    advance appellant's case. Accordingly, the district court's

    decision is affirmed. Loc. R. 27.1. ________
























    ____________________

    We find appellant's argument untenable in light of our recent
    decision in U.S. v. Catano, ___F.3d___, ___, No. 94-1502, _______________
    slip op. at 26 (1st Cir. Sept. 18, 1995)("in a case where the
    PSR findings themselves adequately set forth a meaningful
    rationale for the sentence, a district judge does not err in
    adopting such findings.").

    -7-