FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC U IT APR 16, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ 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. 06- 14818 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 0 0 0 0 7 - CR- T- 2 4 - M SS 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 C A R L O S A G U I L A R , 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

_________________________ ( A p r i l16, 2007) B efo re W IL S O N , P R Y O R an d F A Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

C a r l os A gui l a ra nd ac ode f e nda nt , S a r qui e l M e di na , w e r e i ndi c t e d on c ha r ge s of

c ons pi r a c y t o di s tr i but e a nd pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e 50 gr a m s or m or e of m e tha m phe t a m i ne , i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . §§ 846 a nd 841( b) ( 1) ( A ) ( vi i i ) , a nd pos s e s s i on w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e 50 gr a m s orm or e of m etham ph et am i ne, i n v i ol at i on of 21 U . S . C . § 8 41 (a )( 1), (b)( 1)(A )( vi i i ). In a ddi t i on, A gui l a rw a s c ha r ge d w i th pos s e s s i on of af i r e a rm i n f

ur the r a nc e of

adrug tr a f f ic k in g c r im e , in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § § 9 2 4 ( c ) a n d 2 . A g u ila rp le a d e d g u ilty to a ll th r e e c o u n ts , a n d w a s s e n te n c e d to 2 4 8 m o n th s ’ im p r is o n m e n t. O n ap p e a l, A gu i l arar gu es thathi s s ent ence i s unrea sonabl e. F or the re as on s s etforth m ore f u l l y b e l o w , w e a f

f i rm. A gui l a ra nd M e di naw e r e a rr e s t e d a f t e rac onf

i de nt i a l s our c e a rr a nge d a h a lf - p o u n d m e th a m p h e ta m in e p u r c h a s e w ith M e d in a . A s e a r c h o f th e v e h ic le in w hi c h A gui l a r , M e di na , a nd aj uve ni l e w e r e s i tt i ng unc ove r e d abox c ont a i ni ng 15 5. 1 g ra m s of m etham ph et am i ne and a 9m m se m i aut om at i c handg un . A gu i l ar adm i tt ed thatbo th the drug s and the fi re arm w er e hi s, and thathe had m ore m e tha m phe t a m i ne a nd a nothe rha ndgun i n the r oom he r e nt e d. A s ubs e que nt s e a r c h of A gui l a r ’ s r oom unc ove r e d 19. 6 gr a m s of m e tha m phe t a m i ne m i xtur e a nd a.4 4 M a g n u m h a n d g u n . O n the drug c ha r ge s , the pr oba t i on of f i c e rc a l c ul a t e d aG ui de l i ne3

i m p ri so n m en tran g e o f 2 1 0 -2 6 2 m o n th s’ i m p ri so n m en tb ased o n a t o t al o ffen se l e ve l of 33 a nd ac r i m i na l hi s t ory c a t e gory of V . T he pr oba t i on of

f i c e ri nc l ude d a two - l e v e l e n h a n c e m e n tf o ru s i n g am i n o rt o c o m m i tac r i m e u n d e rU. S . S . G. § 3 B 1. 4, base d o n the fa ctthatthe j uv eni l e, a 17-ye ar -ol d m al e, ac com pani ed A g u i l ar an d M ed i n a t o th e tran sact i o n an d st at ed th atA g u i l ar ask ed h i m t o actas a back-up. A gu i l ar ’ s f

i re arm conv i ct i on carr i ed a s t atut ory m i ni m um fi ve-y ear consec ut i ve se nt ence . T he di stri ctcourtgrant ed a dow nw ar d d eparture t o a cr i m i nal hi st ory cat eg o ry o f IV , red u ci n g A g u i l ar’ s ad v i so ry G u i d el i n e ran g e t o 1 8 8 -2 3 5 m o n th s’ i m pri sonm enton the drug char ges. C on si deri ng the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors, the di stri ct c o u r t f o u n d n o r e a s o n to im p o s e as e n te n c e o u ts id e th e a d v is o ry G u id e lin e r a n g e . T h e c o u r t, w h ic h p r e v io u s ly n o te d th a t: ( 1 ) c o d e f e n d a n t M e d in aw a s n o t h e ld ac coun t abl e f

or the fi re arm or the re crui tm entof a j uv eni l e; (2) M edi na had a l ow er c r i m i na l hi s t ory c a t e gory ; a nd ( 3) the gove rnm e ntf i l e d a§ 5K 1. 1 m ot i on f or s ubs t a nt i a l a s s i s t a nc e on M e di na ’ s be ha l f , f ound “ adi f

f e r e nc e ” i n i t s r e a s ons f

or M ed i n a’ s sen t en ce. Itfu rth er st at ed th atA g u i l ar h ad a g u n an d th atth ere w as a l ar ge qu ant i ty of m etham ph et am i ne, bu tconcl ud ed thati tw ou l d i m po se a s ent ence a tthe l ow e nd of

the G ui de l i ne r a nge ba s e d on A gui l a r ’ s a dm i s s i ons a nd c o o p e r a tio n . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t s e n te n c e d A g u ila rto tw o c o n c u rr e n t 1 8 8 - m o n th4

s e nt e nc e s on the drug c ha r ge s f ol l ow e d by 60 m onths ’ i m pr i s onm e nton the f ir e a rm s c h a r g e , f

o rato ta l s e n te n c e o f

2 4 8 m o n th s ’ im p r is o n m e n t. O n appe a l , A gui l a rc ha l l e nge s the r e a s onabl e ne s s of hi s s e nt e nc e , a r gui ng th a t, in lig h t o f

th e f a c ts a n d c ir c u m s ta n c e s o f th is c a s e , th e c o u r t’s f

a ilu r e to i m po se a s ent ence bel ow the G ui del i ne ra ng e w as error. S peci fi ca l l y, A gu i l ar poi nt s t o: ( 1) hi s pa r t i c i pa t i on i n the of f e ns e onl y a s the s uppl i e r ; ( 2) l a c k of e v id e n c e o f

h is in v o lv e m e n t in a n y s u c h d ru g d e a ls p r io rto h is a rr e s t; (3 ) m it ig atin g circ u m stan ce s s u rr o u n d in g th e m in o r’s r o le b as ed o n th e m in o r’s a ge , 17 y e a r s , a nd m i ni m a l r ol e i n the c r i m e ; ( 4) hi s drug a ddi c t i on; ( 5) the l a c k of v i o l en to r d ru g d eal i n g cri m es i n h i s ad u l tcri m i n al h i st o ry; (6 ) h i s ag e, 2 4 years; ( 7 ) th e lik e lih o o d o f

h is d e p o r ta tio n ; a n d ( 8 ) th e d is p a r a te s e n te n c e r e c e iv e d b y h is c o d e f e n d a n t. W e r e vi e w the f

i na l s e nt e nc e i m pos e d by the di s tr i c tc our tf or re as on abl enes s. U ni t ed S t at es v. W i ni ng ear, 42 2 F . 3d 12 41 , 12 45 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). W hen eval uat i ng the re as on abl enes s of ase nt ence , w e c on si der the fa ct ors out l i ne d i n 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) a nd the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s r e a s ons f ori m pos i ng the part i cul arse nt ence . U ni t ed S t at es v. W i l l i am s, 45 6 F . 3d 13 53 , 13 60 -61 (11 th C i r. 2006) , pe t . f

orc e r t . f i l e d, ( U . S . O c t . 19, 2006) ( N o. 06- 7352) . W he n i m pos i ng a se nt ence , the di stri ctcourtm ustfi rs tcorr ec t l y c al cul at e the G ui del i nes. U ni t ed5

S t at es v. T al l ey , 43 1 F . 3d 78 4, 78 6 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ). S ec on d, the di stri ctcourt m ustconsi der the fol l ow i ng fa ct ors t o d et erm i ne a r ea sonabl e s ent ence : ( 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 eed t o 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 rth 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 ec tthe pu bl i c; (5) the need t o p rovi de the defendantw 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 a nge ; ( 8) pe r t i ne nt p o lic y s ta te m e n ts o f

th e S e n te n c in g C o m m is s io n ; ( 9 ) th e n e e d to a voi 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 .

“ [T ] here i s arang e of r ea sonabl e s ent ence s f rom w hi ch the di stri ctcourtm ay c hoos e ” a nd the bur de n of e s t abl i s hi ng tha tthe s e nt e nc e i s unr e a s onabl e i n l i ghtof th e r e c o r d a n d th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s lie s w ith th e p a r ty c h a lle n g in g th e s e n te n c e . Id. at78 8. “ T he w ei gh tt o b e a cc orded any gi ven § 35 53 (a ) f ac t or i s am att er c om m i tt e d t o the s ound di s c r e t i on of the di s tr i c tc our t [ , ] ” a nd w e w i l l not

“ s ubs t i tut e ourj udgm e nti n w e i ghi ng the r e l e va ntf a c t or s be c aus e ourr e vi e w i s not de novo. ” W i l l i a m s , 456 F . 3d a t1363 ( c i t a t i on, quot a t i on m a rks , a nd a l t e r a t i on om i tt e d) ( e m pha s i s a dde d) . A l though as e nt e nc e w i thi n the G ui de l i ne s r a nge i s not pe rs e r e a s onabl e , the us e of the G ui de l i ne s r e m a i ns c e ntr a l t o the s e nt e nc i ng pr oc e s s a nd w e or di na r i l y e xpe c tas e nt e nc e w i thi n the G ui de l i ne s r a nge t o be re as on abl e. T al l ey , 43 1 F . 3d at78 7-88 . H ow ever , the di stri ctcourt ’ s c ho i ce of a6

s e nt e nc e i s notunf

e tt e r e d. W i l l i a m s , 456 F . 3d a t1363. “ W he n r e vi e w i ng the l ength o f ase nt ence for r ea sonabl enes s, w e w i l l re m and for res ent enci ng i f w e are l ef tw i th the defi ni t e a nd fi rm conv i ct i on thatthe di stri ctcourtcom m i tt ed a c l ear error of j ud gm enti n w ei gh i ng the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors by arr i vi ng ata s ent ence that l i e s out s i de the r a nge of r e a s onabl e s e nt e nc e s di c t a t e d by the f a c t s of the c a s e . ” I d. A gui l a rr e c e i ve d the s t a tut ory m i ni m um c ons e c ut i ve s e nt e nc e on the f i r e a rm s c ha r ge . S e e 18 U . S . C . § 924( c ) ( 1) . H i s 188- m onth s e nt e nc e s on the drug char ges w er e a tthe l ow end o f the G ui del i ne ra ng e the courtca l cul at ed af t er grant i ng a dow nw ar d d eparture a nd w er e w el l bel ow the st atut ory m axi m um t erm o f life im p riso n m en t. S ee 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 1 (b )( 1 )( A )( v ii i). T h e d istrict co u rt’s com m ent s r ef

l ec tthati tre cogn i ze d thatA gu i l ar ’ s c od ef endantw as se nt ence d un der di ff

er entci rc um st ance s. T he courtst at ed thati tconsi dere d the § 3 55 3(a) f a c t or s , a nd s pe c i f

i c a l l y di s c us s e d the f

i r e a rm , the l a r ge a m ountof m etham ph et am i ne, and A gu i l ar ’ s a dm i ss i on s and coop er at i on . N ei ther the di stri ct co u rt’s re as o n in g n o r th e § 3 5 5 3 (a ) f ac to rs w ar ra n t a co n clu sio n th at A g u il ar ’s se nt ence i s unrea sonabl e. In l i gh tof the fore go i ng , A gu i l ar ’ s s ent ence s are AF F I RME D.