Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01542/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01542-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Santiago Gomez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, Chief Judge, United States District Court

for the Southern District of Iowa.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-1542

___________

United States of America,

*

Plaintiff-Appellee, *

 * Appeal from the United States

V. * District Court for the Southern

 * District of Iowa.

Santiago Gomez, *

also known as Santiago, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Defendant-Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 19, 2004

Filed: November 1, 2004

___________

Before MURPHY, HEANEY, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Santiago Gomez was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute cocaine.

The district court1

 found him responsible for 58.54 kilograms of cocaine with a base

offense level of 36, applied a three level enhancement for his role as a manager or

supervisor, and sentenced him to serve 300 months. Gomez appeals, arguing that the

Appellate Case: 04-1542 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/01/2004 Entry ID: 1828529 
2

Counsel for Gomez has requested leave to file a supplemental brief on the

applicability of Blakely v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), but we have decided

not to receive such briefs until after the Supreme Court releases its opinions in United

States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan. See Administrative Order Regarding

Blakely Cases, issued on September 27, 2004.

-2-

district court's findings of drug quantity and role in the offense were not supported

by the evidence.2

 We affirm.

Gomez argues that 40 kilograms of cocaine were improperly attributed to him.

He contends the evidence did not show that he was involved in the 40 kilogram

transaction and that there had been at most preliminary discussions. He also argues

that the transaction was not within the scope of the conspiracy and that the conspiracy

was not capable of delivering that amount. The government points to evidence that

Gomez was part of the same drug network as those who planned this transaction, that

there was an agreement to do the deal, that this transaction was a reasonably

foreseeable activity of the conspiracy in which Gomez had an integral role, and that

the conspiracy was capable of supplying thousands of kilograms of cocaine. We

conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its finding of drug quantity.

Gomez also argues there was no proof he had a managerial or supervisory role

in the conspiracy. There was evidence, however, that Gomez supervised and

managed Darryl Wilson and that he directed cocaine delivery times and locations.

We conclude that the district court did not clearly err in its finding of Gomez's role

in the offense. 

After our de novo review of the district court's application of the sentencing

guidelines to the facts, see United States v. Guy, 340 F.3d 655, 658 (8th Cir. 2003),

we conclude that there is no basis for reversal. The judgment of the district court is

therefore affirmed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1542 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/01/2004 Entry ID: 1828529