Case ID: f-appx_216/html/0916-01.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. Alejandro MARTINEZ, a.k.a. Alex, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-14127
    Non-Argument Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
    Feb. 7, 2007.
    
      Ryan Thomas Truskoski, Orlando, FL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Roberta Josephina Bodnar, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Orlando, FL, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Before DUBINA, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM:

Alejandro Martinez appeals his sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 100 grams or more of heroin, 500 grams or more of methamphetamine, 500 grams or more of cocaine, and 50 grams or more of cocaine base, 21 U.S.C. §§ 846, 841(a)(1), (b)(l)(A)(iii), (b)(l)(A)(viii), (b)(l)(B)(ii); and possession with intent to distribute heroin, 18 U.S.C. § 2; 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). Martinez argues that the district court erred when it applied a two-level leadership-role enhancement to his base offense level under the Guidelines. U.S.S.G. § 3Bl.l(c). We affirm.

“A district court’s upward adjustment of a defendant’s Guidelines offense level due to his status as a leader or organizer under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1 is a finding of fact reviewed only for clear error.” United States v. Phillips, 287 F.3d 1053, 1055 (11th Cir.2002). Martinez acknowledges on appeal that, at his “change of plea” hearing, he admitted that his brother, Javier, a coconspirator, would not do anything unless told to do so by Martinez. Because “the assertion of control or influence over only one individual is enough to support a § 3Bl.l(c) enhancement,” United States v. Jiminez, 224 F.3d 1243, 1251 (11th Cir.2000), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1043, 122 S.Ct. 620, 151 L.Ed.2d 542 (2001), the district court did not clearly err.

AFFIRMED.