FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT M ay 26, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 14792 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 4 6 - CR- T- 2 7 - TBM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s A L V A R O C O R T E S P I N Z O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ay 26, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , C A RN E S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A ppe l l a ntA l va r o C ort e s P i nz on appe a l s hi s 135- m onth s e nt e nc e a f t e rhe2

pl e d gui l ty t o one c ountof c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f i ve ki l ogr a m s orm or e of

c oc a i ne w hi l e on boa r d ave s s e l s ubj e c tt o the j ur i s di c t i on of the U ni t e d S t a t e s , i n vi ol a t i on of 46 U . S . C . A pp. § 1903( a ) , ( g) , a nd ( j ) , a nd 21 U .S .C . § 9 6 0 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) ( ii) , a n d o n e c o u n t o f p o s s e s s io n w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te f i ve ki l ogr a m s orm or e of c oc a i ne w hi l e on boa r d ave s s e l s ubj e c tt o the j uri sdi ct i on of the U ni t ed S t at es , i n v i ol at i on of 46 U . S . C . A pp . § 1 90 3(a) and (g), and 2 1 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B )( i i ). O n app ea l , C ort es P i nzon ar gu es thatthe di stri ct c o u r te rr e d ( 1 ) i n d e n y i n g h i m am i t i g a t i n g - r o l e a d j u s tm e n t , p u r s u a n tt o U. S . S . G. § 3 B 1 . 2 , an d (2 ) b y i m p o si n g an u n reaso n ab l e sen t en ce, o n e g reat er th an th o se re ce i ved b y s i m i l ar l y s i tuat ed defendant s, i n v i ol at i on of U ni ted Stat es v. B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U .S . 2 2 0 , 1 2 5 S . C t. 7 3 8 , 1 6 0 L . E d . 2 d 6 2 1 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . I . U . S. S. G. §3 B1 . 2 m iti

g a ting- r o le a d

j us t m e nt “P o s t- B oo ke r , w e c ont i nue t o r e vi e w the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s appl i c a t i on of the G ui del i nes j ustas w e di d p re - B oo ke r . ” U n ite d S ta te s v . E llis , 419 F . 3d 1189, 1192 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). W e r equi re the di stri ctcourt“ t o cal cul at e c o r r e c tly the se nt enci ng rang e pre sc ri bed b y the G ui del i nes. ” U n i ted S ta tes v. Cra w

f o rd , 407 F .3 d 1 1 7 4 , 1 1 7 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . “T h is C o u r t h a s lo n g a n d r e p e a te d ly h e ld th a t a di stri ctcourt ’ s det erm i nat i on of a def endant ’ s r ol e i n the offens e i s afi nd i ng of fa ct t o b e r evi ew ed on l y f

or cl ear e rr or. ” U

ni te d State s v . D e V

ar on , 175 F . 3d 930, 9373

(11th C i r. 19 99 ) ( e n banc ) . “S o lo n g a s th e b a s is o f th e tr ia l c o u r t’s d e c is io n is s uppor t e d by the r e c or d and d o e s n o ti n v o l v e am i s ap p l i c a t i o n o f aru l e o f l a w,

. . . i t w il l b e r ar e f

o r a n ap p ellate co u rt to co n clu d e th at th e s en ten cin g co u rt’s det erm i nat i on i s c l earl y e rr on eous. ” I d. a t945. T h e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es p erm i ta co u rtt o d ecrease a d efen d an t ’ s o ffen se l e ve l by tw o poi nt s i f

i tf i nds tha tthe de f

e nda ntw a s a“ m i norpa r t i c i pa nt ” i n the c r im in a l a c tiv ity . U .S .S .G . § 3 B 1 .2 ( b ) . A d e f e n d a n t is am in o rp a r tic ip a n t if h e is

“ l es s c ul pabl e than m ostother part i ci pant s, bu t[hi s] rol e c ou l d n otbe desc ri bed as m i n i m al . ” U . S . S . G . § 3 B 1 . 2 , co m m en t . (n . 5 ). T h e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es al so perm i ta c ou rtt o d ec re as e adefe nd ant ’ s off ense l evel by four po i nt s i f i tfi nd s that th e d e f e n d a n twa s a“ m i n i m a l p a r t i c i p a n t ” i n th e c r i m i n a l a c t i v i ty . U. S . S . G. § 3 B 1 . 2 (a). A d efen d an ti s a m i n i m al p art i ci p an ti f h e i s “ p l ai n l y am o n g th e l east c ul pabl e of

thos e i nvol ve d i n the c onduc tof agr oup. ” U . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 2, com m ent . (n. 4). In det erm i ni ng w hether am i t i gat i ng -r ol e r educt i on i s w arrant ed, a di stri ct c o u r t “s h o u ld b e in f

o rm e d b y tw o p r in c ip le s d is c e rn e d f r o m th e G u id e lin e s : f

ir s t, th e d e f e n d a n t’s r o le in th e r e le v a n t c o n d u c t f o rw h ic h [ h e ] h a s b e e n h e ld ac coun t abl e a tse nt enci ng , and, se cond , [hi s] rol e a s c om pare d t o thatof other part i ci pant s i n [hi s] re l evantcond uct . ” D e V ar on , 175 F . 3d a t940. R e ga r di ng the4

firs t p ro n g , w e h av e s tated th at “th e d istrict co u rt m u st m ea su re th e d ef en d an t’ s rol e a gai nstthe re l evantcond uctfor w hi ch [he] has bee n h el d acc ou nt abl e. ” I d.

“ I n othe rw or ds , the di s tr i c tc ourtm us ta s s e s s w he the rthe de f e nda nti s am i noror m in im a l p a rtic ip a n t in r e la tio n to th e r e le v a n t c o n d u c t a ttr ib u te d to th e d e f e n d a n t in ca l cul at i ng [hi s] base offe nse l evel . ” I d. at94 1. U nd erthe fi rs tpron g o f the De V ar on te s t, w e e x p la in e d th a t: [i ] n the drug couri ercont ext , exam pl es of som e r el evantfa ctual co n si d erat i o n s i n cl u d e: am o u n to f d ru g s, fai r m ark etv al u e o f d ru g s, am o u n to f m o n ey t o b e p ai d t o th e c o u r i er, eq u i ty i n t eresti n th e d ru g s, r o le in p la n n in g th e c r i m in a l s c h e m e , a n d r o le in th e d is tr ib u tio n . T h is is n o t a n e x h au s tiv e lis t, n o r d o e s it s u g g e s t th a t a n y o n e f a c to ris m o r e im p o rta n t th a n a n o th e r . I d. at 9 4 5 . N o n eth eles s, w e n o ted th at “b ec au se th e a m o u n t o f d ru g s in a c o u rier ’s pos s e s s i on – w he the rve ry l a r ge orve ry s m a l l – m a y be the be s ti ndi c a t i on of the m a gni tude of

the c our i e r ’ s pa rt i c i pa t i on i n the c r i m i na l e nt e rpr i s e , w e do not fore cl ose the po ss i bi l i ty thatam ou ntof drug s m aybe di sposi t i ve – i n and of i t se l f – i n the extre m e c as e. ” I

d. a t943. A s fo r th e seco n d p ro n g , w e h av e st at ed th at“ th e d i stri ctco u rtm ay al so m e a s u r e th e d e f

e n d a n t’s c u lp ab ility in c o m p a r is o n to th a t o f o th e rp a r tic ip a n ts in the re l evantcond uct . ” I d. at9 4 4 . In assessi n g a d efen d an t ’ s rel ev an tcu l p ab i l i ty, w e h a v e c o n c lu d e d th a t: [ f ] i r s t , the di s tr i c tc ourts houl d l ook t o othe rpa r t i c i pa nt s o n l y t o the5

e x te n t th a t th e y a r e id e n t i f i a b le o rd is c e rn ab le f

r o m th e e v id e n c e . T h is i s afa ct -i nt ensi ve i nq ui ry . S ec on d, the di strict co urtm ayconsi der on l y tho se part i ci pant s w ho w er e i nv ol ved i n the re l evantcond uct attri bu t ed t o the defend an t. T he cond uctof part i cipant s i n any l ar ger c r i m i na l c ons pi racy i s i rr e l e va nt . . . . S i m pl y put , ade f e nda nti s not auto m at i ca l l y e nt i t l ed t o a m i no r r ol e a dj ustm entm er el y bec ause [he] w as so m ew h atl ess cu l p ab l e th an th e o th er d i scern ab l e p art i ci p an t s. R a the r , the di s tr i c t c ourt m us t de t e rm i ne tha t the de f e nda nt w a s l ess c ul pabl e tha n m o s t o th e rp a r tic ip a n ts in [ h is ] r e le v a n t c o n d u c t. I d. a t944. W e c on cl ud e f

rom the re cord thatthe di stri ctcourtdi d n otcl earl y e rrw hen it d e n ie d C o rte s P in z o n am itig a tin g - r o le r e d u c tio n b e c au s e ( 1 ) h e w a s h e ld a c c ount abl e onl y f

orthe qua nt i ty of

c oc a i ne r e l a t e d t o hi s r ol e i n the of f e ns e ; ( 2) the c our tf

ound hi s r ol e , w hi c h i nc l ude d m oni t or i ng the ve s s e l ’ s pl ug a nd thr ow i ng ba l e s of f the ve s s e l be f

or e appr e he ns i on, t o be s i gni f i c a nta nd c r i t i c a l t o the c r im in a l e n te rp r is e ; a n d ( 3 ) h e f a ile d to p r o d u c e a n y e v id e n c e in s u p p o r t o f h is m itig a tin g r o le . See D e V ar on , 1 7 5 F .3 d a t 9 4 1 , 9 4 3 . A c c o r d in g ly , w e a f f irm a s to th is is s u e . II . B oo ker W e r e v ie w s e n te n c e s im p o s e d u n d e rth e p o s t- B oo ke ra dvi s ory G ui de l i ne s c h e m e f o rr e a s o n ab le n e s s . U

ni te d States v . W

i ni nge ar , 4 2 2 F .3 d 1 2 4 1 , 1 2 4 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ; B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U .S . a t 2 6 0 - 6 3 , 1 2 5 S . C t. a t 7 6 5 - 6 6 ( h o ld in g th a t ap p e lla te c o u r t r e v ie w s e n te n c e s f o ru n r e a s o n ab le n e s s in lig h t o f th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s ) .6

F ol l ow i ng the B oo ke rd eci si o n , w e h av e h el d th atth e d i stri ctco u rtm u stfi rst c orr e c t l y c a l c ul a t e the de f e nda nt ’ s a dvi s ory G ui de l i ne r a nge , a nd the n, us i ng the 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) s e nt e nc i ng f a c t or s , the c our tc a n i m pos e am or e s e ve r e or m o r e le n ie n t s e n te n c e a s lo n g a s it is r e a s o n ab le . Cra w f o rd , 407 F . 3d a t 1179. O u rr e v ie w f

o rr e a s o n ab le n e s s is d e f e r e n tia l. U

ni ted Stat es v. T

al ley , 431 F . 3d 78 4, 78 8 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ). “ W e m usteval uat e w hether the se nt ence i m po se d by the di s tr i c tc ourtf

a i l s t o a c hi e ve the purpos e s of s e nt e nc i ng a s s t a t e d i n s e c t i on 35 53 (a ). In ou r e val uat i on of a s ent ence for r ea sonabl enes s, w e r ec og ni ze that th e r e is ar a n g e o f

r e a s o n ab le s e n te n c e s f

r o m w h ic h th e d is tr ic t c o u r t m a y c h o o s e .” I d. T h e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s in c lu d e : ( 1) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e a nd the hi s t ory a nd ch aract eri st i cs o f th e d efen d an t ; (2 ) th e n e e d to refl ectth e seri o u sn ess o f th e o ffen se, t o p ro m o t e resp ectfo r th e l aw , an d t o p ro v i d e j u st p u n is h m e n t f

o r t h e o f f e n s e ; ( 3 ) th e n e e d f

o rd e te rr e n c e ; ( 4 ) th e n e e d to prot e c tthe publ i c ; ( 5) the ne e d t o p r ov i de the de f e nd a ntw i th n ee ded e duc a t i ona l orvoc a t i ona l tr a i ni ng orm e di c a l c a r e ; ( 6) the ki nds of s e nt e nc e s a va i l abl e ; ( 7) the S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s r an ge ; ( 8) pe r t i ne nt p o lic y st at em en t s o f th e S en t en ci n g C o m m i ssi o n ; (9 ) th e n eed to a v o i d unw a nt e d s e nt e nc i ng di s pa r i t i e s ; a nd ( 10) the ne e d t o pr ovi de r e s titu tio n to v ic tim s . I d. a t 7 8 6 ; se e a l

so 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) . W e a l s o ha ve not e d tha t“ w he n the d i s tr i c tc o u rti m p o s e s as e n t e n c e wi th i n th e a d v i s o ry Gu i d e l i n e s r a n g e , we ordi nari l y w i l l expectthatchoi ce t o b e are as on abl e one. ” I d. a t788. I n U n ite d S ta te s v . Sc o tt , w e hel d thata di stri ctcourt ’ s s t at em entthati thad7

c o n s id e r e d th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s a lo n e is s u f

f ic ie n t in p o s t- B oo ke rs e n te n c e s to in d ic a te th a t it c o n s id e r e d th e f a c to r s . 4 2 6 F .3 d 1 3 2 4 , 1 3 2 9 - 3 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e ha ve he l d “ tha tnothi ng i n B oo ke ro re ls e w h e r e r e q u ir e s th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to s t a t e on the r e c or d tha ti tha s e xpl i c i t l y c ons i de r e d e a c h of the § 3553( a ) f

a c t or s or t o d i sc uss e ac h o f the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. ” I d. a t1329. W e ha ve c onc l ude d tha tthe d e f e n d a n t’s s e n te n c e w a s r e a s o n ab le b e c au s e th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a c c u r a te ly c a l c ul a t e d the G ui de l i ne r a nge a nd the de f e nda nt ’ s s e nt e nc e a tthe l ow e nd of the r a n g e r e f le c te d th e c o u rt’s c o n s id e r a tio n o f h is e v id e n c e in m itig a tio n . I d. a t 1 3 3 0 . In the i nst antca se , w e c on cl ud e f rom the re cord thatthe di stri ctcourt i m pos e d ar e a s onabl e s e nt e nc e . F i r s t , the di s tr i c tc our tc orr e c t l y c a l c ul a t e d the G u id e lin e r a n g e . See Cra w f o rd , 4 0 7 F .3 d a t 1 1 7 8 . S e c o n d , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, in s e nt e nc i ng C ort e s P i nz on t o al ow - e nd G ui de l i ne s e nt e nc e t ook i nt o c ons i de r a t i on the s t a tut ory 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) f a c t or s . A l though the di s tr i c tc our tdi d not e x p lic itly d is c u s s e a c h s ta tu to ry f a c to r , it w a s n o t r e q u ir e d to d o s o . See Sc o tt , 426 F . 3d at13 29 . T hi rd, the di stri ctcourtappl i ed the G ui del i nes i n an adv i sory fa shi on . B ec ause , base d o n o ur re vi ew of the re cord, C ort es P i nzon ’ s s ent ence w as re as on abl e, w e a ff

i rm as t o thi s i ss ue. Con c lu s ion B a s e d on ourr e vi e w of

the r e c or d a nd the pa r t i e s ’ br i e f s , w e di s c e rn no8

re vers i bl e e rr or. A cc ordi ng l y, w e a ff i rm C ort es P i nzon ’ s s ent ence . AF F I RME D.