Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41119/USCOURTS-ca5-14-41119-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rogelio Guerrero
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-41119

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

ROGELIO GUERRERO, also known as Barrotes, also known as Canas, also 

known as Canoso,

Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:14-CR-502

Before BARKSDALE, CLEMENT, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rogelio Guerrero appeals the sentence imposed following his jury-trial

convictions for: conspiracy to possess, with intent to distribute, 1,000 

kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) 

and 846; and possession, with intent to distribute, 389.5 kilograms of 

marijuana, in violation of §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), and 18 U.S.C. § 2. 

 

* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. 

R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 10, 2016

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-41119 Document: 00513498869 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/10/2016
No. 14-41119

2

Based on Guerrero’s role as an “organizer/coordinator”, his Pre-sentence 

Investigation Report (PSR) assessed a base-offense level of 34 and, inter alia, 

a three-point enhancement pursuant to Sentencing Guideline § 3B1.1(c). 

Guideline § 3B1.1(c) does not, however, provide for a three-level enhancement. 

Instead, it states: “If the defendant was an organizer, leader, manager, or 

supervisor in any criminal activity other than described in (a) or (b), increase 

by 2 levels”. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c). 

On the other hand, § 3B1.1(a) states: “If the defendant was an organizer 

or leader of a criminal activity that involved five or more participants or was 

otherwise extensive, increase by 4 levels”. § 3B1.1(a). And, § 3B1.1(b) 

provides: “If the defendant was a manager or supervisor (but not an organizer 

or leader) and the criminal activity involved five or more participants or was 

otherwise extensive, increase by 3 levels”. § 3B1.1(b). In any event, Guerrero 

did not object to this discrepancy in district court; and, on appeal, did not 

contend the wrong subsection was applied until his reply brief. Therefore, such 

a challenge is waived. See United States v. Rodriguez, 602 F.3d 346, 360–61 

(5th Cir. 2010). (Arguably, Guerrero could have been subject to the four-level 

enhancement under § 3B1.1(a).) 

Instead, prior to sentencing, Guerrero objected to the PSR, and claimed 

he was not a leader or an organizer. At sentencing, the district court: adopted 

the PSR; applied the three-level enhancement, bringing Guerrero’s totaloffense level to 37; and sentenced Guerrero to, inter alia, 235 months’

imprisonment. In challenging that sentence, Guerrero asserts: the court found 

he was an organizer based on unreliable and inconsistent statements made by 

his co-conspirators; and, at most, he was a low-level operative subject to the 

direction of others in the conspiracy.

 Case: 14-41119 Document: 00513498869 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/10/2016
No. 14-41119

3

Although post-Booker, the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory only, and 

a properly preserved objection to an ultimate sentence is reviewed for 

reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard, the district court must 

still properly calculate the advisory Guidelines-sentencing range for use in 

deciding on the sentence to impose. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 

(2007). In that respect, for issues preserved in district court, its application of 

the Guidelines is reviewed de novo; its factual findings, only for clear error. 

E.g., United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 764 (5th Cir. 2008).

A district court’s determination that a defendant was an organizer or 

leader of criminal activity is a factual finding reviewed for clear error. United 

States v. Rodriguez-Lopez, 756 F.3d 422, 434–35 (5th Cir. 2014). “A factual 

finding is not clearly erroneous if it is plausible in light of the record as a 

whole.” United States v. Zuniga, 720 F.3d 587, 590 (5th Cir. 2013). Moreover, 

a PSR generally bears sufficient indicia of reliability to be considered for 

sentencing purposes. Id. at 591. 

The evidence in the PSR established: Guerrero planned and supervised 

a drug-transporting operation; he exercised decision-making authority by 

recruiting, directing, and paying his co-conspirators; and, the conspiracy 

involved more than five people. Accordingly, the court did not clearly err by 

finding Guerrero was an organizer of the criminal activity and enhancing his

sentence on that basis. See § 3B1.1; § 3B1.1, cmt. n.4; United States v. CantuRamirez, 669 F.3d 619, 629–30 (5th Cir. 2012) (affirming a § 3B1.1(a) 

enhancement). 

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 14-41119 Document: 00513498869 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/10/2016