Case ID: f-appx_192/html/0846-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Silvario HEREA-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 05-15682
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Aug. 8, 2006.
    Bjorn Erik Brunvand, Bjorn E. Brunvand, P.A., Clearwater, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    
      Linda Julin McNamara, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Tampa, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Before ANDERSON, BIRCH and DUBINA, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Appellant Silvario Herea-Martinez appeals the 135-month sentence imposed after being convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine on a vessel subject to United States jurisdiction, 46 App. U.S.C. § 1903(a), and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine on a vessel subject to United States jurisdiction, 46 App. U.S.C. § 1903(a), (g), and (j). On appeal, Herea-Martinez argues that the district court erred in denying his request for a mitigating-role reduction. He argues that United States v. DeVaron, 175 F.3d 930 (11th Cir.1999) (en banc), should be overturned with regard to drug couriers.

“[A] district court’s determination of a defendant’s role in the offense is a question of fact to be viewed under the clearly erroneous standard.” DeVaron, 175 F.3d at 938.

Herea-Martinez asks this panel to revisit and overturn DeVaron; this we cannot do. This panel does not have the authority to overturn the decision of a prior panel, much less a prior en banc decision of this Court. See Cargill v. Turpin, 120 F.3d 1366, 1386 (11th Cir.1997). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not clearly err, and we affirm Herea-Martinez’s sentence.

AFFIRMED.