# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 14 44

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

Pla in ti ff - App el le e

v.

Jo se Rio s- San ch ez, al so kn own as J os e Ri os

Defe nd an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka - Lin co ln

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 2, 2 01 8 Fi le d: Ju ly 16, 2 01 8 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, SHEPHERD, and ERICKSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.

Jo se Ri os -San ch ez ag reed to tra ns po rt dr ug s fro m W as hi ng to n to Ark an sa s in

ex ch an ge fo r $1 ,50 0.0 0. W he n Neb ras ka St at e Pat ro l of fic ers st op pe d Ri os -San ch ez fo r ex pi red li cen se pl at es , he co ns en te d to a ve hi cl e se arch

. W hi le c on du ct in g th e

se arch , th e of

fic ers di sc ov ered se ve n po un ds of m et ha m ph et am in e in a co ol er in si de th e ve hi c l e an d 1.3 gr am s of m et ha m ph et am in e in Ri os -San ch ez’s so ck

. He pl edgu il ty to po ss es si on wit h in te nt to de li ve r 50 0 g ram s o r m or e o f m et ha m ph et am in e, in vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ) an d 84 1( b) (1 ). Ri os -San ch ez fai le d to ap pe ar at hi s se nt en ci ng he ari ng sc he du le d fo r Ja nu ary 23 , 20 02

. He ev ad ed cap tu re fo r ov er fo ur te en y ears be fo re he w as fin al ly loc at ed li vi ng in W y om in g. Th e d is tri ct co ur t 1

se nt en ced Ri os -San ch ez to a st at ut or y m in im um te rm of 12 0 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t. On ap pe al , Ri os -San ch ez arg ue s th a t t h e d i s tri ct co ur t erre d whe n it fo un d th at he fai le d t o q ua li fy

for saf et y -v al ve rel ie f. W e aff

irm.

I. Ba ck gr ou nd

In 20 01 , Ri os -San ch ez li ve d wi th hi s wife an d ch il dr en in W as hi ng to n. In

or de r to su p p l e ment hi s in co m e, Ri os -San ch ez ag reed to de li ve r dr ug s to an in di vi du al in Ark an sa s at th e req ue st of hi s br ot he r’s br ot he r-i n- la w. He ne ve r m ad e th e de li ve ry , as he was st op pe d by la w en fo rcem en t of fic ers in Neb ras ka fo r ex pi red li cen se pl at es

. Ri os -San ch ez co ns en te d to a se arch , whi ch rev eal ed se ve n po un ds of

m et ha m ph et am in e in a co ol er an d 1 .3 g ram s o f m et ha m ph et am in e in hi s s oc k.

Ri o s
- S an ch ez pl ed gu il ty to po ss es si on wit h in te nt to de li ve r 50 0 gr am s or

m or e of m et ha m

ph et am in e. He face d a te n- y ear m an da to ry m in im um pe na lt y

. Ri os
Sa n c h ez fle d th e juri sd ic ti on an d di d no t ap pe ar fo r hi s se nt en ci ng he ari ng

. He

mo v e d wit h hi s wife an d ch il dr en to W y om in g whe re he li ve d un ti l he was l o c a t e d by law en fo rcem en t o n Oct ob er 1 1, 2 01 6.

A se nt en ci ng he ari ng was he ld on Feb ru ary 16 , 20 17 , du rin g whi ch th e di st ric t

co ur t de te rm in ed th at Ri os -San ch ez was in el ig ib le fo r rel ie f un de r th e sa fet y -v al ve pr ov is io ns of 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (f) an d U n i t e d S ta te s Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s § 5 C 1

. 2 ( a ) be cau se Ri os -San ch ez ha d fai le d to pr ov id e al l in fo rm at io n an d ev id en c e

The Hon or ab le Ri ch ard G. Kop f, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of Nebr as ka

. -2

-he ha d co nc ern in g th e of fen se be fo re hi s Ja nu ary 20 02 se nt en ci ng he ari ng

. In su pp or t of hi s m ot io n fo r a m in or ro le red uc ti on , Ri os -San ch ez te st ifi ed at th e Feb ru ary 20 17

se nt en ci ng he ari ng

. He al so pr ov id ed a writ te n sa fet y -v al ve st at em en t. The di st ric t

co ur t fo un d th at , whi le so m e of th e te st im on y Ri os -San ch ez pr ov id ed ha d “ a rin g of
tr u t h t o i t , ” ot he r te st im on y ab ou t th e ci rcu m st an ces of th e of fen se si m pl y was no t cred ib le

.

The co ur t de ni ed Ri os -San ch ez’s m ot io n fo r rel ie f un de r th e sa fet y -v al ve an d f o r a m in or ro le ad

jus tm en t. The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at Ri os -San ch e z ’s b a s e of fen se le ve l was 32 , whi ch was in crea se d to le ve l 34 be cau se he ob st ru ct ed jus ti ce. In cri m in al hi st or y cat eg or y I, Ri os -San ch ez’s ap pl ic ab le ad vi so ry gu id el in e ran ge

was 15 1 to 18 8 m on th s. The co ur t gr an te d a do wnwar d va ria nc e ba se d on Ri os
San ch ez’s ph y si cal co nd it i o n a n d s en te nc ed hi m to a te rm of 12 0 m on th s’ im pr is on m en t t o b e fo ll owe d b y a fi ve -y ear t erm

of s up erv is ed rel eas e.

On ap pe al , Ri os -San ch ez arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t’s erro ne ou s in te rp ret at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (f) de pr iv ed hi m of th e op po rtu ni ty to be se nt en ced be lo w th e st at ut or y

m in im um

.

II

. Dis cus si on

W e rev ie w fact ua l fin di ng s as to sa fet y -v al ve el ig ib il it y fo r cl ear erro r an d in te rp ret at i on of th e st at ut or y sa fet y -v al ve de no vo

. Uni te d St at es v. Ru ach o, 74 6 F.3 d 85 0, 8 53 (8t h C ir. 2 01 4) . 18 U.S.C.§ 3 55 3( f) al lo ws a di st ric t cou rt to im po se

a se nt en ce be lo w th e st at ut or y m in im um se nt en c e i f th e de fen da nt sa ti sf ie s fiv e req ui rem en ts

. Uni te d St at es v. Delg ro ss o, 85 2 F.3 d 82 1, 82 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ). The onl y re qui rem en t at is su e is whe th er Ri os -San ch ez sa ti sf ie d th e fif th req ui rem en t– tha t is “ no t la te r th an th e ti m e of th e se nt en ci ng he ari ng , th e de fen da nt ha s tru th fu ll y pr ov id ed to th e Gov ern m en t al l in fo rm at io n a n d ev id en ce th e de fen da nt ha s

-3

-co nc ern in g th e of fen se or of

fen se s.” 18 U.S.C. § 35 53 (f)(5 ); U.S.S.G. § 5C 1.2 (a)( 5)

.

Th e g o v e r n ment co nc ed ed th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in fin di ng th at Ri os
San ch ez was in el ig ib le fo r sa fet y -v al ve rel ie f be cau se th e in fo rm at io n was no t pr ov id ed be fo re t he in it ia l s en te nc in g h eari ng . The err or , ho wev er, was ha rm le ss

.

“ W e rev ie w fo r cl ear err o r a d i s tri ct co ur t’s fin di ng s reg ard in g th e

co m pl et en es s an d tru th fu ln es s of in fo rm at io n pr ov id ed by a de fen da nt .” Delg ro ss o, 85 2 F .3d at 8 29 . The defe nd an t bear s t he bu rd en to sh ow t ha t h e h as sat is fie d e ach
req ui rem en t fo r th e sa fet y va lv e. Uni te d St at es v. Alv arad o- R i v era, 41 2 F.3 d 94 2, 94 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). “ Affi rm an ce is req ui red if th e reco rd s u p p o r ts th e co ur t’s fin di ng s, re ga rd le ss of wh ic h p art y is fav or ed .” Id

.

Ri os -San ch ez pr ov id ed in co ns is te nt st at em en ts reg ard in g hi s in vo lv em en t in th e of fen se

. He pr ov id ed on e ve rs io n th at he dr ov e to th e dr ug de al er’s ho us e to pi ck
up t h e d r u g s an d an ot he r ve rs io n whe re th e dr ug de al er br ou gh t th e dr ug s to hi s ho us e. Ri os -San ch ez di d no t pr ov id e sp eci fic s on whe n an d whe re th e de li ve ry was

su pp os ed to ta ke pl ace. The di st ric t co ur t fo un d Ri os -San ch ez’s ex pl an at io n th at th e ba gg ie of m et ha m

ph et am in e fo un d in hi s so ck was a sa m pl e f o r t h e dr ug de al er l a c k ed cred ib il it y

. Afte r rev ie win g th e en ti re reco rd , we fin d th ere is su ff i c i e n t

ev id en ce su pp or ti ng th e di st ric t co ur t’s fin di ng s reg ard in g th e la ck of co m pl et en es s

an d t ru th fu ln es s o f Ri os -San ch ez’s i nf or m at io n a bo ut th e o ffen se

.

II I. Con cl us io n

Th e d i s tri ct co ur t’s erro r in fin di ng Ri os -San ch ez was in el ig ib le fo r

co ns id erat io n un de r th e sa fet y va lv e was ha rm le ss

. Ri os -San ch ez’s writ te n sa fet y
va lv e st at em en t an d hi s te st im on y at th e se nt en ci ng he ari ng de m on st rat e h e d id no t
tru th fu ll y pr of

fer al l in fo rm at io n ab ou t hi s in vo lv em en t in th e of fen se an d, th eref

or e,

-4

-di d n ot sat is fy hi s b ur de n of sh owi ng he was be en en ti tl ed to rel ie f un de r th e sa fet y

va lv e. The ju dg m en t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-5

-