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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 39 44

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

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Ja m ie Lee Hun t

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l 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 M in ne so ta - St. Pa ul

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Octo be r 17 , 20 16 Fi le d: Octo be r 27 , 20 16 [Pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ _
Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , W OLLMAN and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Ja m ie Lee Hun t pl ed gu il ty to co ns pi racy to di st rib ut e 5 0 0 gr am s or m or e of

m et ha m ph et am in e, in vi ol at io n of 21 U.S.C. § 84 1( b)

. He ch al le ng es th e di st r i c tco ur t’s de ni al of a two -le ve l red uc ti on fo r a m in o r ro le in th e co ns pi racy, an d hi s 1

se nt en ce as su bs ta nt iv el y an d pr oc ed ur al ly un reas on ab le

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C.§ 1 29 1, t hi s co ur t af fir m s.

P o l ic e were in ve st ig at in g a m et h co ns pi racy op erat in g in Mi nn es ot a, Te x a s ,
an d M ex ic o. Pa rt o f th e co ns pi racy was le d by th ree Ort eg a b ro th ers , each wit h h is

own so ur ces a n d cl ie nt el e. Hun t faci li ta te d Sal va do r Orte ga ’s di st rib ut io n of m et h
in Mi nn es ot a. Hun t ag reed to se ll two ou nc es of m et h to an un de rco ve r ag en t, sa y in g he typic al ly so ld m or e bu t un de rs to od th e ag en t wan te d to sa m pl e th e qu al it y

. Hun t

so ld an ot he r fo ur ou nc es to th e ag en t 12 da y s la te r, an d po li ce fo ll owe d Hun t to a

se pa rat e lo cat io n whe re he m et wit h Sal va do r Orte ga

. Hun t w a s i n d i c t ed wit h te n
ot he rs

. He pl ed gu il ty. His ba se of fen se le ve l was de te rm in ed by th e 16 4.8 gr am s of

a c t u a l met h h e so ld th e ag en t. Bas ed on a ran ge of 13 0 to 16 2 m on th s, th e di st ric t

co ur t s en te nc ed hi m

to 14 4 m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t.

I.

Gui de li ne 3B 1.2 a u t h or iz es a two -le ve l de crea se if th e de fen da nt is a m in or
pa rti ci pa nt in an y c r i mi na l act iv it y

. “ W he th er a de fen da nt pl ay ed a m in or ro le is a
qu es ti on of fact
, rev ie wed fo r cl ear erro r.” Uni te d St at es v. Y ou ng , 68 9 F.3 d 94 1, 94 6 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 1 2 )

. Hun t ha s th e bu rd en to pr ov e he pl ay ed a m in or ro le

. Id

. The

se nt en ci ng co m

m is si on rece nt ly cl ari fie d: “Th e f a ct th at a de fen da nt pe rfo rm s an

e s s e n t i a l or in di sp en sa bl e ro le in th e cri m in al act iv it y is no t de te rm in at iv e. Su ch a de fen da nt m ay rece iv e an ad jus tm en t un de r th is gu id el in e if he or sh e is su bs ta nt ia ll y le ss cu lp ab le th an th e av erag e pa rti ci pa nt in th e cri m in al act iv it y .” U.S.S.G. § 3B 1.2
, App . Not e 3 (C) (a s amend ed by A m en dm en t 7 94 , eff. Nov . 1, 2 01 5)

.

The Hon or ab le Ri ch ard H. Ky le
, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of Mi nn es ot a.

-2

-The di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y de ni ed Hun t’s req ue st fo r a red uc ti on un de r § 3B 1.2

.

He cl ai m s he is le ss cu lp ab le th an th e av e r a ge pa rti ci pa nt be cau se he was cau gh t

se ll in g m et h on ly twi ce, an d two c o

- d efen da nt s were res po ns ib le fo r si gn ifi can tl y
g r e a t er am ou nt s of m et h. Howev er, Hun t ad m it te d in th e pl ea ag reem en t t o in vo lv em en t in th e co ns pi racy fo r ov er two a n d a ha lf y ears

. Acco rd in g to th e
pr es en te nc e rep or t, Hun t was op erat in g wit h an d fo r Sal va do r Orte ga , who ad m it te d di st rib ut in g 45 po un ds of m et h. Hun t to ld th e un de rco ve r ag en t th at he typic al ly di d

no t se ll sm al le r am ou nt s (li ke wha t he so ld hi m ), an d te st s sh owe d Hun t’s m et h was

ve ry pu re. Bef

or e hi s arres t, Hunt co nt act ed th e ag en t abo ut ob ta in in g m et h to ta ke

to an ot he r st at e. W hi le th e p le a ag reem en t hel d Hun t resp on si bl e fo r on ly the m et h
in th e two co nt ro ll ed b u ys , h e w a s no t, as he sa y s, “ a m in or de al er at th e bo tt om l ev el ” du rin g hi s two an d a ha lf y ears in th e co ns pi racy. Hun t di d no t mee t t h e bu rd en to sh ow le ss cu lp ab il it y th an th e av erag e pa rti ci pa nt

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Gomez -Val le
, 82 8 F.3 d 32 4, 33 1 (5 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (“ Am en dm en t 79 4 do es no t pr ov id e

an affi rm at iv e rig ht to a § 3 B 1

. 2 r e d u c ti on to ev ery act or bu t th e cri m in al

m as te rm in d.” ).

II.

Hun t o bjec ts to th e se nt en ce as pro ced ur al ly and su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le

.

“ Thi s co ur t rev ie ws se nt en ces in two st ep s: fir st , fo r si gn ifi can t pr oc ed ur al erro r; an d
if th ere is no ne , for su bs ta nt iv e rea so na bl en es s.” Uni te d S ta te s v. Ma rt in , 75 7 F.3d
77 6, 77 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ). Pro ced ur al erro rs in cl ud e “ fai li ng to cal cu la te (o r im pr op erl y cal cu la ti ng ) th e Gui de li ne s ran ge , tre at in g th e Gui de li ne s as m an da to ry , fai li ng to co ns id er th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s, se le ct in g a s en te nc e ba se d on cl earl y

erro ne ou s fact s, or fai li ng to ad eq ua te ly ex pl ai n th e ch os en se nt en ce— in cl ud in g an

ex pl an at io n fo r an y de vi at io n fro m th e Gui de li ne s ran ge .” Gal l v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2
U.S. 38 , 51 (20 07 ).

-3

-Hun t cl ai m s th e di st ric t co ur t pr oc ed ur al ly erre d by f a i l i n g to ad eq ua te ly

ex pl ai n hi s se nt en ce an d to gi ve fu ll co ns id erat io n to th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s. Hun t di d

no t ob ject at se nt en ci ng

. Rev ie w is fo r pl ai n erro r. U n i t e d St at es v. Cl ay to n , 82 8
F.3 d 6 54 , 65 7 (8 th Cir . 20 16 ).

“ In de te rm in in g wh et he r a d is tri ct co ur t co m m it te d pr oc ed ur al erro r, [w]e do

no t req ui re a di st ric t co ur t to pr ov id e a m ech an ic al reci ta ti on of th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s whe n de te rm in in g a se nt en ce. Rat he r, it si m pl y m us t be cl ear fro m th e reco rd th at th e di st ric t co ur t act ua ll y co ns id ered th e § 35 53 (a) fact or s in de te rm in in g th e se nt en ce.”
Feems te r v. Un i t e d S t at es , 57 2 F.3 d 45 5, 46 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (en ba nc ) (in te rn al

qu ot at io ns om it te d)

. Thi s co ur t lo ok s to th e en ti re reco rd
, no t jus t th e di st ric t co ur t’s

st at em en ts at th e he ari ng

. Cl ay to n , 82 8 F.3 d at 65 7. At se nt en ci ng th e di st ric t co ur t

sa id th at

ap pl y in g al l of th e fact or s in 35 53 , t ho se are th e o ne s t ha t I re ad in th e

reco rd he re a few m om en ts ag o, it ’s m y jud gm en t th at a se nt en ce of 14 4

m on th s i s t h e a p p r op ria te di sp os it io n in th e cas e. Tha t’s 12 y ears in
pr is on

. I th in k it m eet s each of th e fact or s th at I am to ta ke in to acco un t,

ne it he r to o hi gh or to o lo w

. I t ’s a le ng th y se nt en ce. I’m no t tryin g to d i s gu is e th at

. Bu t I th in k un de r th e ci rcu m st an ces of th is cas e it i s de se rv ed

.

The di st ric t co ur t ru le d on th e PSR, he ard arg um en t fro m bo th pa rti es at se nt en ci ng ,
an d ci te d al l th e § 35 53 ( a) fact or s at se nt en ci ng

. The di st ric t co ur t di d no t co m m it

pr oc ed ur al erro r. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Bat ti es t , 55 3 F.3 d 11 32
, 11 36 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (h ol di ng di st ric t co ur t di d no t co m m it pr oc ed ur al erro r whe n reco rd sh owe d co ur t ha d

ex am in ed th e PSR, he ar d o r a l a r g um en t fro m bo th si de s, an d was aware of se ct io n 35 53 (a) fa ct or s)

.

In th e a b s en ce of pr oc ed ur al erro r, th is co ur t co ns id ers th e “ su bs ta nt iv e

r e as on ab le ne ss of th e se nt en ce im po se d un de r an ab us e-o f-d is cret io n st an da r d

. ”

-4

-Feems te r , 57 2 F.3 d at 46 1. A di st ric t co ur t ab us es it s di sc ret io n whe n it “ (1 ) fai ls to

co ns i d e r a rel ev an t fact or th at sh ou ld ha ve rece iv ed si gn ifi can t weig ht ; (2 ) gi ve s si gn ifi can t weig ht to an im pr op e r o r i r r e le va nt fact or ; or (3 ) co ns id ers on ly th e
ap pr op ria te fact or s bu t in weig hi ng th os e fact or s co m m it s a cl ear erro r of jud gm en t.” Id

.

Hun t cl ai m s th e di st ric t co ur t ei th er di d no t ad dr es s, or ga ve in su ffi ci en t weig ht

to , hi s m it ig at in g ci rcu m st an ces —i nc lu di ng hi s su bs ta nc e ab us e an d ADHD, th at hi s lo ng es t pr io r se nt e n c e w a s on ly 60 m on th s, th at a lo wer se nt en ce wou ld av oi d

un warra nt ed se nt en ci ng di sp ari ti es wit h co -d efen da nt s, an d th at hi s cri m in al hi st or y is “ ex ag ge rat ed .” Th e d i st ric t co ur t co ns id ered an d reject ed th es e arg um en ts

su bm it te d in Hun t’s se nt en ci ng po si ti on pa pe r, an d ag ai n at se nt en ci ng

. Se e Uni te d
St at es v. Ti mbe rl ak

e , 67 9 F.3d 10 08
, 10 12 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (p res um in g di st ric t cou rt

co ns id er e d an d reject ed de fen da nt ’s arg um en ts rai se d in se nt en ci ng po si ti on

m em or an du m an d at se nt en c i n g h e a rin g)

. The reco rd su pp or ts th e di st ric t co ur t’s reject io n of Hun t’s a r g u m en ts

. Hun t’s ex te ns iv e cri m in al hi st or y be ga n at a y ou ng
ag e, an d he ha d co m

pl et ed di f f e r e nt dr ug tre at m en t pr og ram s in th e pa st

. Fi na ll y , Hun t’s twi n br ot he r, who pl ay ed a s i m il ar ro le in th e co ns pi racy, was se nt en ced to 14 0 m on th s fo r hi s i n v o lv em en t. Hun t’s m id -ran ge se nt en ce is reas on ab le

. Se e Uni te d St at es v. Sa n Mig ue l
, 63 4 F.3 d 47 1, 47 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (“ A se nt en ce th at fal ls wit hi n a pr op erl y cal cu la te d ad vi so ry gu id el in e ran ge

. . . is pr es um pt iv el y reas on ab le

on ap pe al .”).

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

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

-5

-