### F I LE D U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E LEVE NTH CI RCUI T Se pt e m be r 30, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN C L E RK [ 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. 04- 12040 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 3 - 1 0 0 2 4 - CR- SH 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 D A N I E L F R A N C I S C O R A M I R E Z , L E O N E L G A S P A R A N G U L O - Q U I N O N E S , D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lla n ts .

________________________ A pp ea l s f

rom the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 30, 2005) B e f o r e T J O F L A T , A N D E R S O N a n d B I R C H , C ir c u it J u d g e s . P E R C U R I A M:2

D a n ie l F r a n c is c o R a m ir e z a n d L e o n e l G . A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ap p e a l th e ir c onvi c t i ons a nd s e nt e nc e s f orc 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 or m or e ki l ogr a m s of

c oc a i ne , i n vi ol a t i on of 46 U . S . C . §§ 1903( a ) , ( g) , ( j ) , a nd 21 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B ), and p osse ss i on w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e f i ve or m ore k ilo g r a m s o f

c o c a in e w h ile o n b o a r d a v e s s e l s u b je c t to U n ite d S ta te s ju r is d ic tio n , in v io la tio n o f

4 6 U .S .C . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , ( g ) , 2 1 U .S .C . § 9 6 0 ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) , a n d 1 8 U .S .C . § 2 . W e a f f i rm the i rc onvi c t i ons , va c a t e the i rs e nt e nc e s , a nd r e m a nd f orr e s e nt e nc i ng. I . B AC KG RO UN D O n M a y 30, 2003, the U ni t e d S t a t e s N a vy F r i ga t e M c I ne rny i nt e r c e pt e d a stra nd ed, fl agl es s, “ go -f as t ” boatoff the coas tof C ol om bi a. T he fr i gat e’ s c re w o b serv ed fi v e p eo p l e, R am i rez, A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es, an d th ei r th ree co -d efen d an t s, R afael L o p ez, O m ar R i asco s, an d E l i as S an t i est ev an (“ th e d efen d an t s”) o n th e g o -fast boa t , appa r e nt l y try i ng t o s t a r tthe e ngi ne . T he c r e w of the N a vy f

r i ga t e di r e c t e d the d efen d an t s b y l o u d sp eak er t o rai se th ei r h an d s i n th e ai r, an d th ey co m p l i ed . A s a N a vy boa r di ng t e a m appr oa c he d the go- f a s tboa t , f

ourof the de f e nda nt s , i nc l udi ng A ng ul o-Q ui no nes a nd R am i re z, j um ped o verboard i nt o the w at er . R i as cos r em ai ned onboa r d a nd s e tf

i r e t o the go- f

a s tboa tbe f

or e j um pi ng i nt o the w a t e rhi m s e l f . T he c r e w of the f r i ga t e obs e rve d num e r ous pa c ka ge s i n the c e nt e rof the ve s s e l a nd r e c o v e r e d p a c k a g e s f

lo a tin g n e a rth e s in k in g g o - f a s t b o a t.L opez, Riascos, and Santiestevan entere d guilty pleas to Count 1. 1 3 O n M a y 31, 2003, the de f e nda nt s a nd c oc a i ne pa c ka ge s w e r e tr a ns f e rr e d by the U ni t e d S t a t e s C oa s tG ua r d t o the na va l ba s e a tG ua nt a na m o, C uba . I O N s c a ns of e a c h of the de f e nda nt s i ndi c a t e d the pr e s e nc e of c oc a i ne r e s i due . T he s e pa c ka ge s of coca i ne l at erw er e det erm i ned t o con t ai n 4 28 . 1 k i l og ra m s of c ocai ne, w i th an e s tim a te d s tr e e t v a lu e o f w e ll o v e r$ 8 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 . T h e d e f e n d a n ts w e r e c h a r g e d in a tw o - c o u n t in d ic tm e n t w ith c o n s p ir a c y to pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f i ve orm or e ki l ogr a m s of c oc a i ne w hi l e onboa r d a ve s s e l s ubj e c tt o U ni t e d S t a t e s j ur i s di c t i on, i n vi ol a t i on of 46 U . S . C . §§ 19 03 (a ), (g), (j ), and 2 1 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B ) ( “ C ou nt1”). T hey a l so w er e c harged w ith p o s s e s s io n w ith in te n t to d is tr ib u te f iv e o rm o r e k ilo g r a m s o f c o c a in e w h ile o n b o a r d a v e s s e l s u b

j e c tt o U n i t e d St a t e s j u r i s d i c t i o n , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 4 6 U . S. C. § 1 90 3(a) , (g), 21 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B ), and 1 8 U . S . C . § 2 (“ C ou nt2”). R am i re z an d A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es p l ed n o tg u i l ty. 1 P r io rto tr ia l, th e g o v e rn m e n t m o v e d to a llo w th e a d m is s io n a t tr ia l o f f a c ts su rro u n d i n g A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es’ s p ri o r arresto n d ru g traffi ck i n g ch arg es, a c know l e dgi ng tha tA ngul o- Q ui none s w a s a c qui tt e d of the c ha r ge s . S pe c i f

i c a l l y , the go vernm entsoug htt o i ntrodu ce evi dence that , i n 2 00 0, A ng ul o-Q ui no nes w as arrest ed aft er b ei n g fo u n d b y th e C o astG u ard C u tt er T h et i s i n a stran d ed , fl ag l ess,4

go- f a s tboa tof

f the c oa s tof

C ol om bi a w i th 2400 ki l ogr a m s of c oc a i ne f

l oa t i ng i n the w a te rn e a rth e v e s s e l. T h e g o v e rn m e n t s o u g h t to in tr o d u c e th e e v id e n c e in o r d e rto s how A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s c r i m i na l i nt e nta nd know l e dge , pl a nni ng, pr e pa r a t i on, a nd abse nce of ac ci dentor m i st ake. A ng ul o-Q ui no nes f i l ed a m ot i on i n l i m i ne, r e que s t i ng tha tthe e vi de nc e of hi s pr i ora rr e s tbe e xc l ude d. T he di s tr i c tj udge r e s e rv e d ru lin g o n A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s m o tio n . R a m ir e z f

ile d a m o tio n f

o rs e v e r a n c e , o n th e g r o u n d th a t ajo in t tr ia l w o u ld preventthe j ury f

rom m aki ng a r el i abl e j ud gm entabou thi s gui l tor i nn ocence be c a us e of

the s i gni f

i c a ntdi s pa r i ty i n the gove rnm e nt ’ s e vi de nc e a ga i ns tA ngul oQ ui none s vi s - a - vi s R a m i r e z , a nd the r i s k of undue , s pi l l ove rpr e

j udi c e f r om the i nt ended i ntrodu ct i on of evi dence of A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s pri or, si m i l arac t s. R am i re z ar gu ed thatun fa i r pre

j ud i ce w ou l d ari se fr om evi dence thatA ng ul o-Q ui no nes w as arrest ed i n 2 0 0 0 i n co n n ect i o n w i th an i n ci d en ti n v o l v i n g a stran d ed , fl ag l ess, g o -fast boa tof f the c oa s tof

C ol om bi a w i th f

ourothe rc r e w m e n a nd a s ubs t a nt i a l a m ountof c oc a i ne f l oa t i ng i n the w a t e r . T he di s tr i c tj udge de ni e d R a m i r e z ’ s m ot i on. T he di stri ctj ud ge ul t i m at el y a l l ow ed the go vernm entt o q uest i on A ng ul o-Q ui no nes dur i ng c r os s - e xa m i na t i on r e ga r di ng the f a c t s s urr oundi ng hi s 2000 a rr e s t . T he j udge th e n in s tru c te d th e ju ry th a t th e in f o rm a tio n w ith r e s p e c t to th e e v e n t in 2 0 0 0 c o u ld5

notbe c ons i de r e d c onc e rni ng R a m i r e z a nd c oul d notbe c ons i de r e d a s e vi de nc e of A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s g u ilt in th e c h a r g e d o f f e n s e . An g u l o - Qu i n o n e s t e s t i f i e d th a th e h a d b e e n a f

i s h e rm a n h i s e n t i r e l i f

e . He w as tra vel i ng by bu s t o ano ther c i ty t o l oo k for w ork, w hen a grou p o f uni form ed m e n s t oppe d the bus a nd s e a r c he d i t s pa s s e nge r s . T he uni f or m e d m e n t ook A ngul oQ ui none s ’ s doc um e nt a t i on i de nt i f y i ng hi m a s the c apt a i n of a f i s hi ng ve s s e l a nd f o r c e d h im a n d n in e o th e rm e n in to a tru c k . A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s c ap to r s h e ld h im u n d e ra rme d g u a r d i n a h o u s e f o rtw o w e e k s a n d o r d e r e d h i m t o ma k e a tr i p f o rth e m. W h e n A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s r e f u s e d h is c ap to r s ’ d e m a n d , th e y b e a t h im a n d th r e a te n e d to ki l l hi s daugh t er s unt i l he ac qu i es ce d. H i s c apt ors t oo k h i m t o a beach and ordered hi m t o t ake abo att o a part i cul arC ol om bi an i sl and, w here he w as t o con t ac tan in d iv id u a l n a m e d “P e s o ” b y r a d io f o rf in a l in s tru c tio n s o n d e liv e r in g th e b o a t to P e s o . R 5 a t196- 98. A ngul o- Q ui none s w a s br oughtt o a go- f a s tboa tw i th a c r e w of

f our m e n tha the di d notknow . H e w a s the c apt a i n a nd ope r a t e d the boa t . I d. a t208, 215- 17. A ngul o- Q ui none s t e s t i f i e d tha the a l e r t e d the othe r s t o the pr e s e nc e of the U ni t e d S t a t e s C oa s tG ua r d a nd tha the di d notknow a ny of the othe rc r e w m e n on the v e s s e l. T he go vernm entas ked o n cross -e xam i nat i on w hether A ng ul o-Q ui no nes had been st op ped o n a go -f

as tbo ati n 2 00 0 and t aken aboard the C oastG uard C ut t er6

T het i s. H e r es po nd ed af fi rm at i vel y. R 5 at22 5-26 . W hen asked w hether, on that s a m e d a y , c o d e f

e n d a n t S a n tie s te v a n w a s ta k e n ab o a r d th e C o a s t G u a r d C u tte rT h e tis a nd tr a ns por t e d a l ong w i th A ngul o- Q ui none s t o G ua nt a na m o B a y , C uba , A ngul oQ ui none s r e s ponde d tha the di d notknow . O n r e - di r e c te xa m i na t i on, A ngul oQ ui none s t e s t i f

i e d tha t , i n 2000, S a nt i e s t e va n w a s noton hi s ow n go- f a s tboa t , a nd tha the ne ve rl e a rne d the na m e s of the othe r s pi c ke d up by the C oa s tG ua r d. A ngul oQ ui no nes a gree d thatautho ri t i es foun d 2 , 40 0 p ou nd s of c ocai ne fl oat i ng nearhi s boat on thatocca si on . R 4 at44 . O n redi re ctexam i nat i on , A ng ul o-Q ui no nes s t at ed that there w er e three bo at s i n the ar eaatthe t i m e of hi s a rr es ti n 2 00 0, thatno coca i ne w as f o u n d o n h is b o a t, a n d th a t h e h a d b e e n a c q u itte d o f a ll c h a r g e s . R am i rez t est i fi ed th ath e h ad b een a fi sh erm an fo r th i rty-fo u r years, w as a m em b ero f th e C ar ib en a F ed er atio n o f F ish er m en , an d h ad a v alidfish er m an ’s l i c e ns e . H e w a s tr a ve l i ng by bus t o a nothe rc i ty t o l ook f orw ork, w he n a gr oup of h e a v ily a rm e d m ilita ry p e r s o n n e l s to p p e d th e b u s in a ju n g le a r e a p r o n e to g u e r illa ac ti v ity. T h e a rm ed in d iv id u als to o k R am irez ’s n atio n ality c ar dan d fish er m an ’s d o c u m e n ta tio n , a n d f

o r c e d h im in to a je e p . R a m ir e z te s tif ie d th a t h is c ap to r s h e ld hi m i n a hous e i n the m ount a i ns f orf ourda y s , be f

or e t a ki ng hi m t o a be a c h, f or c i ng h i m o n t o a b o a t , th r e a t e n i n g h i m, a n d i n s tru c t i n g h i m t o h e l p tr a n s p o r tth e b o a t . R7 at25 8-60 . R am i re z drove the go -f as tbo atfor three t o si x h ou rs . H e t es t i fi ed that7

A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s to ld h im in w h ic h d ir e c tio n to d r iv e u s in g a c o m p a s s . I d . a t 2 8 1 . R a m i r e z f

ur the rt e s t i f

i e d tha tA ngul o- Q ui none s w a s gi vi ng di r e c t i ons t o the f our peop l e on the bo at . Id. at27 8. R am i re z t es t i fi ed thathe changed a fuel t ank at A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s in s tru c tio n . I d . a t 2 8 0 . R am i re z t es t i fi ed i ni t i al l y thathe j um ped i nt o the w at erbecause the bo atw as on f i r e . T he gove rnm e ntthe n i ntr oduc e d a vi de ot ape de pi c t i ng R a m i r e z j um pi ng in to th e w a te rw h e n th e r e w a s n o f ir e o n th e b o a t. T h e g o v e rn m e n t a s k e d R a m ir e z if he ha d be e n de t a i ne d w i th c ode f e nda ntR i a s c os w ho pl e d gui l ty , thus i nf orm i ng the j ury of R i a s c os ’ s gui l ty pl e a i n the pr oc e s s . R 6 a t45. R a m i r e z ’ s c ouns e l ha d not f i ni s he d e num e r a t i ng a l l of hi s obj e c t i ons t o the que s t i on, i nc l udi ng l e a di ng, w he n the ju d g e s u s ta in e d it. I d . A tthe c l os e of

the e vi de nc e , the di s tr i c tj udge i ns truc t e d the j ury tha t“ a ny thi ng the l a w y e r s s a y i s note vi de nc e i n the c a s e . ” R 7 a t348. T he c our ta l s o i ns truc t e d the j ury tha te vi de nc e of

a c t s by A ngul o- Q ui none s c om m i tt e d on a nothe roc c a s i on a nd s im ila rto th e a c ts c h a r g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t m u s t n o t b e c o n s id e r e d in d e c id in g if A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s c o m m itte d th e a c ts c h a r g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t, b u t o n ly to de t e rm i ne A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s s t a t e of m i nd, i nt e nt , pl a n, pr e pa r a t i on, a c c i de ntor m is ta k e . I d . a t 3 5 0 - 5 1 .8

D ur i ng de l i be r a t i on, the j ury s e ntthe j udge a w r i tt e n que s t i on: “ I s thi s the f i s hi ng l i c e ns e a c opy oror i gi na l of the doc um e ntt a ke n of

f R a m i r e z a tthe t i m e of

the i nc i de nt ? ” R 1- 87. T he j udge r e turne d a w r i tt e n r e pl y : “ Y ourque s t i on ha s no be a r i ng on, orc onne c t i on w i th, a ny i s s ue i n thi s c a s e . ” I d. T he j ury c onvi c t e d A ngul oQ ui no nes a nd R am i re z on b oth cou nt s. R am i re z s ub se qu ent l y f i l ed a m ot i on for new tr i a l a nd a m ot i on f

orj udgm e ntnotw i ths t a ndi ng the ve r di c t . T he di s tr i c tj udge de ni e d R a m i r e z ’ s m ot i ons . T he j udge s e nt e nc e d R a m i r e z t o 235 m onths of i ncar ce ra t i on on ea ch coun t , t o run concurrent l y, and fi ve ye ar s of s up ervi se d r e le a s e . T he prob at i on offi ce r pre pare d a pre- se nt ence i nv es t i gat i on re po rt(“ P S I” ), a s s i gni ng A ngul o- Q ui none s a ba s e of f e ns e l e ve l of

38, w i th a tw o- l e ve l e nha nc e m e nt f o rb e i n g th e c ap t a i n o f

a v e s s e l c a rry i n g a c o n tr o l l e ds u b s t a n c e , u n d e rU. S . S . G. § 2 D 1 .1 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ) , a n d a f o u r - le v e l e n h a n c e m e n t u n d e rU .S .S .G . § 3 B 1 .1 ( a ) f o rh is r ol e a s a n or ga ni z e rorl e a de rof a c r i m i na l a c t i vi ty i nvol vi ng m or e tha n f i ve pa r t i c i pa nt s , f

ora t ot a l of

f e ns e l e ve l of

44. A ppl y i ng a c r i m i na l hi s t ory c a t e gory of I , the pr oba t i on of

f i c e rc onc l ude d tha tthe appl i c abl e S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s r a nge w a s lif e im p r is o n m e n t. A ng ul o-Q ui no nes r ai se d sever al obj ec t i on s t o the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes d e te rm in a tio n . F ir s t, h e a r g u e d th a t th e im p o s itio n o f s e n te n c in g e n h a n c e m e n ts9

unde rU . S . S . G . §§ 3B 1. 1( a ) f orbe i ng a n or ga ni z e r/ l e a de rw a s i m pr ope rbe c a us e a ny l ea ders hi p act i vi t i es thathe perf orm ed w er e r el at ed t o the op er at i on of the vess el as c apt a i n. A tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng, A ngul o- Q ui none s c l a r i f i e d tha tthe appl i c a t i on of both U . S . S . G . §§ 3B 1. 1( a ) f orbe i ng a n or ga ni z e r/ l e a de r , a nd 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) f or be i ng a c apt a i n/na vi ga t or , w oul d c ons t i tut e i m pr ope rdoubl e - c ount i ng. A ngul oQ ui none s a l s o obj e c t e d tha tthe gove rnm e ntha d nots how n tha the w a s i m por t i ng or e xpor t i ng the drugs w hi l e s e rvi ng a s c apt a i n of the ve s s e l , be c a us e the r e w a s no s h o w in g o f

im p o r t o re x p o r t. H e c o n te n d e d th a t h e w a s n o m o r e c u lp ab le th a n h is codefendant s w ho engaged i n i dent i ca l cond uctbu tent er ed gu i l ty pl ea s a nd re ce i ved s e n te n c e s s ig n if

ic a n tly lo w e rth a n 3 6 0 m o n th s o f in c a r c e r a tio n . T he di s tr i c tj udge r e

j e c t e d A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s doubl e - c ount i ng a r gum e nta nd f o u n d th a t c a s e la w s u p p o r te d th e g o v e rn m e n t’s a r g u m e n t th a t th e ap p lic a tio n o f b o th U . S . S . G . §§ 3B 1. 1 ( or ga ni z e r/ l e a de r ) a nd 2D 1. 1( c apt a i n/na vi ga t or ) doe s not const i tut e dou bl e- coun t i ng . N on ethel es s, the j ud ge i m po se d o nl y atw o-l evel e nha nc e m e ntunde rU . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 1( c ) , r a the rtha n the f our - l e ve l e nha nc e m e nt re com m ended b y the prob at i on offi ce r und er§ 3 B 1. 1(a) . T he j ud ge express ed d i ssat i sfact i o n w i th th e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es as ap p l i ed i n A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es’ s case because he l ac ked the di sc re t i on t o t ake A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s a ge i nt o acc ou nt , such thatthe 36 0-m on th sent ence atthe bo tt om of the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes r ange w as10

e f f e c t i ve l y a l i f

e s e nt e nc e . T he j udge s e nt e nc e d A ngul o- Q ui none s t o 360 m onths of i nc a r c e r a t i on a nd f

i ve y e a r s of

s upe rvi s e d r e l e a s e . B oth R a m i r e z a nd A ngul oQ u i n o n es ap p eal th ei r co n v i ct i o n s an d sen t en ces. I I . DI S CUS S I ON A . S uf f i c i e nc y of

the E vi de nc e t o S uppor tR a m i r e z ’ s C onvi c t i ons O n ap p e a l, R a m ir e z a r g u e s th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s in s u f f ic ie n t to s u p p o r t h is c o n v ic tio n s . S p e c if

ic a lly , h e a s s e r ts th a t th e r e w a s n o e v id e n c e th a t h e h a d s p e c if ic i nt e ntt o j oi n the c ons pi r a c y , be c a us e hi s a s s oc i a t i on w i th the c ons pi r a t or s w a s the r e s u lt o f h is ab d u c tio n o rc o e r c io n . R a m ir e z m a in ta in s th a t h e n e v e ra g r e e d to pa r t i c i pa t e i n the c ons pi r a c y a nd tha tthe ve r di c tw a s the r e s ul tof m e r e s pe c ul a t i on base d o n h i s c od ef

endant s’ cr i m i nal hi st ori es . H e e m ph as i ze s thatthe evi dence show ed thathe di d n otkn ow the other peopl e on the go -f as tvess el . R am i re z a rgues tha the di d notknow i ngl y a nd w i l l f ul l y pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e the c oc a i ne be c a us e he di d notknow tha tthe c oc a i ne w a s on the ve s s e l , pa r t i c i pa t e i n l oa di ng the c o c a in e o n th e v e s s e l, o rh a v e a m e a n s o f e s c ap in g th e v e s s e l in o p e n s e a s . A c c o r d in g ly , R a m ir e z a r g u e s th a t th e e v id e n c e w a s in s u f f ic ie n t to s u p p o r t h is c onvi c t i ons be c a us e he l a c ke d the r e qui s i t e i nt e ntt o c om m i te i the rof f e ns e , a nd be c a us e he ne ve rha d c ontr ol of the c oc a i ne f

orpurpos e s of

e s t abl i s hi ng a c tua l or c ons truc t i ve pos s e s s i on.11

W e r e vi e w “ s uf

f i c i e nc y of

the e vi de nc e de novo, vi e w i ng the e vi de nc e i n the l i ghtm os tf

a vor abl e t o the gove rnm e nta nd dr a w i ng a l l r e a s onabl e i nf e r e nc e s a nd c r e di bi l i ty c hoi c e s i n f

a vorof the j ury ’ s ve r di c t . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. T ruj i l l o, 146 F . 3d 838, 845 ( 11th C i r . 1998) . T he e vi de nc e ne e d note xc l ude e ve ry hy pothe s i s of in n o c e n c e o rb e c o m p le te ly in c o n s is te n t w ith e v e ry c o n c lu s io n o th e rth a n g u ilt be c a us e a j ury m a y s e l e c ta m ong c ons truc t i ons of the e vi de nc e . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. H a r d y , 8 9 5 F .2 d 1 3 3 1 , 1 3 3 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 0 ) . P u r s u a n t to 4 6 U .S .C . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , it is un l aw ful for apers on on bo ar d a vess el subj ec tt o the j uri sdi ct i on of the U ni t ed S t at es “to k n o w in g ly o rin te n tio n a lly m a n u f a c tu r e o rd is tr ib u te , o rto p o s s e s s w ith in te n t to m anufacture or di stri bu t e, a c on trol l ed subst ance . ” 46 U . S . C . § 1 90 3(a) . M oreover,

“ [ a ] ny pe r s on w ho a tt e m pt s orc ons pi r e s t o c om m i ta ny of f e ns e de f i ne d i n [ T i t l e 46, C hapt er38 , M ar i t i m e D rug L aw E nforcement] shal l be subj ec tt o the sa m e penal t i es a s thos e pr e s c r i be d f

orthe of f e ns e , the c om m i s s i on of w hi c h w a s the obj e c tof the a tte m p t o rc o n s p ir a c y .” 4 6 U .S .C . § 1 9 0 3 ( j) . W e have re cogn i ze d thata l ar ge qu ant i ty of i l l i ci tdrug s on a sm al l vess el supp ort s aj ury’ s i nfer ence thatthe pers on s onb oard the vess el w er e not“ un af fi l i at ed byst anders . ” U ni t ed S t at es v. C ruz- V al dez, 77 3 F . 2d 15 41 , 15 46 -47 (11 th C i r. 19 85 ). W e e num e r a t e d othe rf

a c t or s w hi c h c a n s uppor ta j ury ’ s f i ndi ng of pa r t i c i pa t i on i n a d ru g tr a f f ic k in g c o n s p ir a c y , in c lu d in g th e le n g th o f th e v o y a g e , th e r e la tio n s h ip12

betw ee n the capt ai n and cr ew , “ suspi ci ou s behavi or or di vers i on ary m aneuvers bef ore appr e he ns i on, a n a tt e m ptt o f l e e , i nc ul pa t ory s t a t e m e nt s m a de a f t e rappr e he ns i on, w i tne s s e d pa r t i c i pa t i on a s a c r e w m a n, w he the rthe c ontr aba nd w a s obvi ous , a nd the ab s e n c e o f

s u p p lie s o re q u ip m e n t n e c e s s a ry to th e v e s s e l’s in te n d e d u s e .” I d . a t 1 5 4 7 . S i gni f i c a nt l y , w he r e “ the pr e s e nc e of the l a r ge qua nt i ty of

[ c ontr aba nd] w a s c l e a ra nd unc ont e s t e d, the pr oof

r e qui r e d t o e s t abl i s h the e xi s t e nc e of a c ons pi r a c y a nd [ the de f e nda nt ’ s ] pa rt i c i pa t i on i n i tw oul d a l s o s uf f i c e t o pr ove hi s pos s e s s i on of the [ c o n tr ab a n d ].” I d . a t 1 5 4 4 . T he r e i s s uf

f i c i e nte vi de nc e t o s uppor tR a m i r e z ’ s c ons pi r a c y a nd pos s e s s i on c onvi c t i ons . T he r e w e r e onl y f i ve c r e w m e m be r s . T he e s t i m a t e d va l ue of the c oc a i ne w a s appr oxi m a t e l y $8, 000, 000. T he c oc a i ne pa c ka ge s w e r e vi s i bl e on the bo at , w hi ch had n o o ther c ar go . T he approach of the C oastG uard bo ar di ng t ea m prom pt ed R am i re z a nd the other c re w m em bers t o l eap i nt o rou gh se as w hi l e f l am es ove r t ook the i raba ndone d ve s s e l . A ddi t i ona l l y , R a m i r e z m odi f i e d hi s a c c ountof w hen h e l eaptfr om the vess el w hen con fr on t ed w i th a vi deot ape of thatevent . B as ed o n th e r e a s o n in g s e t f

o r th in C ru z - V a ld e z , th e e v id e n c e in th is c a s e is s u f f ic ie n t to su p p o rtR am i rez’s co n v i ct i o n s. B . D eni al of R am i re z’ s M ot i on for S ever ance13

R a m ir e z a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t ju d g e ab u s e d h is d is c r e tio n b y d e n y in g h is m ot i on f ors e ve r a nc e be c aus e he w a s unf a i r l y pr e j udi c e d by “ s pi l l ove r ” f r om e v id e n c e o f

A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s a n d c o d e f e n d a n t S a n tie s te v a n ’s p r io r , e x tr in s ic a c ts r e l a t i n g t o th e i ra rr e s tf

o rd ru g tr a f

f i c k i n g i n 2 0 0 0 . S e e F e d . R . C r i m . P . 4 0 4 ( b ) . He cont ends thatevi dence of A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s kno w l edge of the sc hem e a nd cr i m i nal in te n t p r e ju d ic e d R a m ir e z ’s d e f

e n s e s o f la c k o f k n o w le d g e a n d c r im in a l in te n t. R am i re z a rgues thatthe adm i ss i on of the R ul e 404 (b) e vi dence cr ea t ed an i m prop er in f e r e n c e o f g u ilt b y a s s o c ia tio n . T he deni al of a m ot i on t o severi s r evi ew ed for abu se of di sc re t i on . U ni t ed S t a t e s v. W a l s e r , 3 F . 3d 380, 385 ( 11th C i r . 1993) . “ W e w i l l notr e ve r s e the de ni a l of a s e ve r a nc e m ot i on abs e nta c l e a rabus e of di s c r e t i on r e s ul t i ng i n c om pe l l i ng pr e j udi c e a ga i ns tw hi c h the di s tr i c tc our tc oul d of f e rno pr ot e c t i on. ” I d. A de f e nda nt ca n sho w com pel l i ng prej ud i ce by dem on stra t i ng “ thatthe j ury w as un abl e t o si ft throu gh the evi dence and ‘ m ake a n i nd i vi du al i ze d d et erm i nat i on as t o eac h de f e nda nt . ’ ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S c hl e i , 122 F . 3d 944, 983 ( 11th C i r . 1997) ( c i t a t i on om i tt ed). A j ury i s pre sum ed t o fol l ow the i nstruct i on s gi ven t o i tby the di stri ct ju d g e . U n ite d S ta te s v . S h e n b e r g , 8 9 F .3 d 1 4 6 1 , 1 4 7 2 ( 1 1 th C ir .1 9 9 6 ) . “T h is c o u r t is re l uct antt o revers e adi stri ctcourt ’ s deni al of se vera nce, part i cul ar l y i n con spi ra cy14

ca se s, as g en er ally ‘p er so n s w h o ar e c h ar g ed to g eth ersh o u ldalso b e tried to g eth er .’ ” U n ite d S ta te s v . K n o w le s , 6 6 F .3 d 1 1 4 6 , 1 1 5 8 ( 1 1 th C ir .1 9 9 5 ) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . T h e d is tr ic t ju d g e ’s d e n ia l o f R a m ir e z ’s m o tio n f

o rs e v e r a n c e d id n o t c o n s titu te a c l e a rabus e of

di s c r e t i on. R a m i r e z di d notm e e thi s bur de n t o s how c om pe l l i ng prej ud i ce : thatthe j ud ge’ s f i rs tl i m i t i ng i nstruct i on t o the j ury, re gardi ng the evi dence of Q ui none s ’ s pr i ora c t s a nd the i rl a c k of r e l e va nc e t o R a m i r e z , w a s i ne f f e c tua l ; or tha tthe j ury c oul d notm a ke a n i ndi vi dua l i z e d de t e rm i na t i on a s t o hi s gui l tor i nn ocence. A ny po t ent i al prej ud i ce t o R am i re z f rom adm i ss i on of the evi dence re g ar d in g Q u in o n es an d S an ti es tev an ’s ar re st in 2 0 0 0 w as m it ig ated b y th e ju d g e’s l i m i t i ng i ns truc t i on t o the j ury a nd R a m i r e z ’ s ow n de f e ns e t e s t i m ony tha the ha d no pri or ac qu ai nt ance w i th A ng ul o-Q ui no nes or S ant i es t evan before the i nci dentat is s u e . C . D eni al of R am i re z’ s M ot i on for M i stri al R a m ir e z a s s e r ts th a t th e d is tr ic t ju d g e ab u s e d h is d is c r e tio n b y d e n y in g h is m o tio n f o ra m is tr ia l b e c a u s e th e c u m u la tiv e e rr o r s p r e ju d ic e d h is r ig h t to a f

a irtr ia l. S peci fi ca l l y, R am i re z a rgues thatthe prosec ut or’ s di sc l osure t o the j ury that c ode f e nda ntR i a s c os ha d e nt e r e d a gui l ty pl e a w a s hi ghl y pr e j udi c i a l , i rr e l e va nt , a nd no n-prob at i ve. H e a l so cont ends thatthe di stri ctj ud ge abused hi s di sc re t i on w hen he a dvi s e d the j ury tha tthe i rque s t i on c onc e rni ng hi s f i s he rm a n’ s l i c e ns e ha d no15

be a r i ng on orc onne c t i on w i th a ny i s s ue i n the c a s e . R a m i r e z c ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tj udge ’ s a ns w e ri m pr ope r l y s ugge s t e d tha thi s e xhi bi tw a s notr e l e va nta nd, c ons e que nt l y , i nva de d the pr ovi nc e of the j ury . H e e m pha s i z e s tha tw he the rthe lic e n s e w a s ta k e n f

r o m h im b y a u th o r itie s w a s r e le v a n t to c o rr o b o r a te o rd is c r e d it h is d e f e n s e te s tim o n y th a t h is k id n ap p e r s s e iz e d h is f is h e rm a n ’s d o c u m e n ta tio n . F i nal l y, he re i t er at es hi s a rgum entthathe w as prej ud i ce d b y s pi l l ov erfr om i m prop er R u le 4 0 4 ( b ) e v id e n c e o f A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s a n d S a n tie s te v a n ’s p r io ra rr e s t. W e r e v ie w a d is tr ic t’s d e n ia l o f a m o tio n f

o rm is tr ia l f

o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . T ru jillo , 1 4 6 F .3 d a t 8 4 5 . “W e h a v e h e ld th a t th e ‘c u m u la tiv e e f f e c t’ o f m u ltip le e rr or s m a y s o pr e

j udi c e a de f

e nda nt ’ s r i ghtt o a f

a i rtr i a l tha ta ne w tr i a l i s r e qui r e d, e ve n i f the e rr or s c ons i de r e d i ndi vi dua l l y a r e non- r e ve r s i bl e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. T ho m as , 62 F . 3d 13 32 , 13 43 (11th C i r. 19 95 ). “ A defe nd anti s e nt i t l ed t o a fa i r tri al butnota pe r f

e c tone . ” L utw a k v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 344 U . S . 604, 619, 73 S . C t . 481, 4 9 0 ( 1 9 5 3 ) ; U n ite d S ta te s v . A d a m s , 7 4 F .3 d 1 0 9 3 , 1 0 9 9 - 1 1 0 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 6 ) . W e a l s o ha ve r e c ogni z e d tha t“ e rr or s w e r e m a de butthe s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s of the D ef endant s w er e notaf

fe ct ed by tho se errors because properl y a dm i tt ed evi dence s u f f ic ie n tly e s tab lis h e d th e irg u ilt.” A d a m s , 7 4 F .3 d a t 1 1 0 0 . T h e d istrict j u d g e d idn o t ab u se h is d iscr etio n w h en h e d en ied R am irez ’s re qu es tfor anew tri al . A s w e have expl ai ned, prop er l y a dm i tt ed evi dence16

suff i ci ent l y e st abl i shed R am i re z’ s gui l t . T he di stri ctj ud ge corre ct l y s ust ai ned R a m ir e z ’s o b

je c tio n to th e p r o s e c u to r ’s q u e s tio n c o n c e rn in g R ia s c o s ’s g u ilty p le a . C o n s e q u e n tly , th e r e w a s n o te s tim o n y o n th a t is s u e . M o r e o v e r , th e ju d g e e x p r e s s ly i ns truc t e d the j ury a tthe c l os e of the e vi de nc e tha t“ a ny thi ng the l a w y e r s s a y i s not e vi de nc e i n the c a s e . ” R 7 a t348. R a m i r e z ’ s r e a di ng of the j udge ’ s r e s pons e t o the j ury que s t i on i s ove r l y br oa d. T he j udge di d notdi r e c tthe j ury t o di s r e ga r d the a l r e a dy a dm i tt e d f

i s hi ng l i c e ns e ; he i nf

orm e d the m tha ti tw a s i rr e l e va ntw he the rthe e xhi bi ts ubm i tt e d t o the j ury w a s a n or i gi na l orc opy of the doc um e nt , w he n the a uthe nt i c i ty of

the doc um e ntha d notbe e n c ha l l e nge d. A ddi t i ona l l y , the e vi de nc e of A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s p r io ra rr e s t w a s p r o p e r ly a d m itte d a n d a n y p o te n tia l p r e ju d ic e to R am i re z w as m i t i gat ed by the j ud ge’ s l i m i t i ng i nstruct i on . T here fore , the di stri ct ju d g e d id n o t ab u s e h is d is c r e tio n b y d e n y in g R a m ir e z ’s m o tio n f o rm is tr ia l. D . A d m i ssi o n o f A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es’ s P ri o r A rrest A ng ul o-Q ui no nes a rgues thatthe tri al courti m prop er l y a dm i tt ed evi dence r e l a t i ng t o a uthor i t i e s ’ di s c ove ry of 2, 400 pounds of

c oc a i ne i n the a r e a of

A ngul oQ ui no nes’ s ves se l w hen h e w as arre st ed i n 2 00 0. H e c on t ends thatthi s di sc l osure w a s in a d m is s ib le p r o p e n s ity e v id e n c e u n d e rF e d e r a l R u le o f E v id e n c e 4 0 4 ( b ) . A ng ul o-Q ui no nes a ss ert s thatthe prej ud i ci al i m pactof i m prop erprop ensi ty e vi dence o u tw e ig h e d its p r o b a tiv e , im p e a c h m e n t v a lu e o n a c o lla te r a l is s u e . W ith r e s p e c t toQuinones’s brie f re fer s to Santiestevan as “ Santes Estaban.” 2 17 the pr oba t i ve va l ue of

the e vi de nc e , A ngul o- Q ui none s a r gue s tha tthe f a c ttha tthe s a m e C oa s tG ua r d C utt e rpi c ke d up A ngul o- Q ui none s , S a nt i e s t e va n, a nd othe r s on 2 d iffe re n t g o -f

as t v es se ls o n th e s am e d ay d o es n o t d isp ro v e A n g u lo -Q u in o n es ’s t e s t i m ony tha the di d notknow S a nt i e s t e va n pr i ort o the i ns t a ntc a s e . A ngul oQ ui no nes m ai nt ai ns thatthe di sc l osure of the 2, 40 0 p ou nd s of c ocai ne near hi s ves se l in 2 0 0 0 w a s n o t n e c e s s a ry in o r d e rto im p e a c h h im r e g a r d in g h is f a ilu r e to r e c a ll m e e tin g S a n tie s te v a n . W e r evi ew the di stri ctcourt ’ s a dm i ss i on of pri or cr i m es or bad act s und er F e de r a l R ul e of

E vi de nc e 404( b) f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. H oga n, 986 F . 2 d 1 3 6 4 , 1 3 7 3 (1 1 th C i r. 1 9 9 3 ). R u l e 4 0 4 (b ) p ro v i d es: E vi de nc e of

othe rc r i m e s , w r ongs , ora c t s i s nota dm i s s i bl e t o pr ove the char ac t erof a per son i n o rdert o sho w ac t i on i n con form i ty there w i th. It m a y , how e ve r , be a dm i s s i bl e f orothe rpurpos e s , s uc h a s pr oof of m ot i ve , oppor tuni ty , i nt e nt , pr e pa r a t i on, pl a n, know l e dge , i de nt i ty , or abs e nc e of

m i s t a ke ora c c i de nt , pr ovi de d tha tupon r e que s tby the a c c u s e d , th e p r o s e c u tio n in a c r im in a l c a s e s h a ll p r o v id e r e a s o n ab le no t i ce i n adv ance of tri al . . . of the general nature of a ny such evi dence it in te n d s to in tr o d u c e a t tr ia l. F e d . R . E v id . 4 0 4 ( b ) . I n d e te rm in in g w h e th e re v id e n c e is a d m is s ib le u n d e rR u le 404( b) , w e appl y a thr e e pa r tt e s t : “ ' ( 1) the e vi de nc e m us tbe r e l e va ntt o a n i s s ue o th e rth a n d e f

e n d a n t’s c h a r a c te r ; ( 2 ) th e p r o b a tiv e v a lu e m u s t n o t b e s u b s ta n tia lly o u tw ei g h ed b y i t s u n d u e p rej u d i ce; (3 ) th e g o v ern m en tm u sto ffer su ffi ci en tp ro o f so18

tha tthe j ury c oul d f

i nd tha tde f

e nda ntc om m i tt e d the a c t . ' ” H oga n, 986 F . 2d a t1373 ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . A s i m i l a r i ty be tw e e n the othe ra c ta nd a c ha r ge d of f e ns e w i l l m a ke the other off

ense hi gh l y probat i ve w i th regar d t o a defendant ’ s i nt enti n the charged o f f e n s e . I d . a t 1 3 7 4 . T he di stri ctj ud ge di d n otabuse hi s di sc re t i on by adm i tt i ng the evi dence r e l a t i ng t o a uthor i t i e s ’ 2000 a rr e s tof A ngul o- Q ui none s a nd di s c ove ry of l a r ge qu ant i t i es of cocai ne near hi s ves se l atthe t i m e of the arre st . R egar di ng the fi rs tst ep in o u rd e te rm in a tio n o f

th e a d m is s ib ility o f

s u c h e v id e n c e , th e e v id e n c e is r e le v a n t to a n is s u e o th e rth a n A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s c h a r a c te r , n a m e ly th e tru th f u ln e s s o f h is t e s t i m ony tha the ha d no pr i ora c qua i nt a nc e w i th hi s c ode f e nda nt , a nd A ngul oQ ui no nes’ s kno w l edge of the use of go-fas tbo at s i n the tra nspo rtof l ar ge qu ant i t i es o f co cai n e. W i th resp ectt o th e seco n d st ep o f o u r an al ysi s, th e ev i d en ce i s al so p r o b a tiv e . A lth o u g h th e p r e s e n c e o f A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s a n d o n e o f h is c o d e f

e n d a n ts i n the s a m e pl a c e a tthe s a m e t i m e unde rs i m i l a rc i r c um s t a nc e s i n 2000 doe s not concl usi vel y e st abl i sh thatthey m et , the evi dence m akes such a m ee t i ng appear mo re pr obabl e . T he e vi de nc e f ur the ri s pr oba t i ve of

A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s c r i m i na l i nt e nt because i tm akes i tappear mo re prob abl e thathe kn ew the obj ec tof the charged c ons pi r a c y . T he s i m i l a r i ty of c i r c um s t a nc e s i n w hi c h A ngul o- Q ui none s f ound hi m se l f, apprehended o ff the C ol om bi an coas ti n a fl agl es s, go -f as tbo atsurr ou nd ed19

by l a r ge qua nt i t i e s of

c oc a i ne i s hi ghl y pr oba t i ve of hi s c r i m i na l i nt e nt . S e e i d. ( “ T he si m i l ar i ty betw ee n the tw o cri m es and the fa ct s r el at i ng there t o m ake the form er c onvi c t i on hi ghl y pr oba t i ve of [ the de f e nda nt ’ s ] i nt e nt ” ) . M or e ove r , the r i s k of u n d u e p r e

ju d ic e to A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s w a s r e d u c e d b y th e c o u r t’s lim itin g in s tru c tio n . T here fore , the di stri ctj ud ge di d n otabuse hi s di sc re t i on by adm i tt i ng the evi dence r e l a t i ng t o a uthor i t i e s ’ 2000 a rr e s tof A ngul o- Q ui none s a nd di s c ove ry of l a r ge qua nt i t i e s of

c oc a i ne ne a rhi s ve s s e l a tthe t i m e of the a rr e s tbe c a us e the pr oba t i ve v al u e o f th e ev i d en ce o u tw ei g h ed th e ri sk o f u n d u e p rej u d i ce t o A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es. E . A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s E nha nc e m e nt s f orB e i ng L e a de rof

the C ons pi r a c y a nd C apt ai n o f the V es se l A ngul o- Q ui none s a r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tj udge m i s appl i e d the S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s by e nha nc i ng hi s s e nt e nc e unde rboth U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) , f or be i ng the c apt a i n of

a ve s s e l c a rry i ng a c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e , a nd U . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 1, f orbe i ng the or ga ni z e rorl e a de rof c r i m i na l a c t i vi ty . H e c ont e nds tha tappl i c a t i on of both e nha nc e m e nt s c ons t i tut e d doubl e - c ount i ng i n vi ol a t i on of the D oubl e J e opa r dy C l ause . W e r evi ew al l egat i on s of i m perm i ss i bl e dou bl e c ou nt i ng de no vo . U ni t ed S t a t e s v. R e ndon, 354 F . 3d 1320, 1333 ( 11th C i r . 2003) , c e r t . de ni e d, 541 U . S . 1035, 12 4 S . C t . 21 10 (200 4). T he tw o- l e ve l e nha nc e m e ntunde r§ 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) i s i m pos e d w he n “ ‘ the defe nd antac t ed as a pi l ot , copi l ot , capt ai n, navi gat or, fl i gh toffi ce r, or any other20

op er at i on offi ce r abo ar d any cr af tor vess el ca rryi ng a c on trol l ed subst ance . ’ ” I d. at 1330 ( quot i ng U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) ) . T he r e i s no di s put e tha tA ngul oQ ui no nes w as soug htt o capt ai n the subj ec tgo -f as tbo atbecause he posse ss ed doc um e nt a t i on i de nt i f

y i ng hi m a s the c apt a i n of a f i s hi ng ve s s e l a nd tha the w a s the c apt a i n a nd ope r a t e d the boa t . T he e vi de nc e s how e d tha tthe go- f a s tboa tw a s be i ng used t o tra nspo rta s ub st ant i al am ou ntof cocai ne i nt o the U ni t ed S t at es w hen i tw as i nt er ce pt ed by the N avy f ri gat e. C on se qu ent l y, the appl i ca t i on of the tw o-l evel enhancem entfor bei ng capt ai n o f the subj ec tgo -f as tbo atw as approp ri at el y i ncl ud ed in c a lc u la tin g A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s ’s s e n te n c e . A defe nd ant ’ s r ol e a s a n o rgani ze r or l ea der i s afa ctual fi nd i ng thatw e r evi ew for c l ea r e rr or t o d et erm i ne i f the enhancem entun der § 3B 1. 1 w as appl i ed ap p r o p r ia te ly . I d . a t 1 3 3 1 . T h e f a c to r s th a t as e n te n c in g c o u r t c o n s id e r s to d e c id e if thi s e nha nc e m e nti s appl i c abl e a r e : “ ‘ ( 1) e xe r c i s e of de c i s i on- m a ki ng a uthor i ty , ( 2) na tur e of pa r t i c i pa t i on i n the c om m i s s i on of the of f e ns e , ( 3) r e c rui tm e ntof ac com pl i ce s, (4) c l ai m ed ri gh tt o a l ar ger s hare of the frui t s of the cr i m e, (5) degree of pa r t i c i pa t i on i n pl a nni ng oror ga ni z i ng the of f e ns e , ( 6) na tur e a nd s c ope of the i l l egal ac t i vi ty, and (7) degree of c on trol and autho ri ty e xerc i se d o ver others . ’ ” I d. at 13 31 -32 (ci t at i on om i tt ed). T he se nt enci ng j ud ge gave A ng ul o-Q ui no nes atw o-l evel e n h a n c e m e n t f

o rb e in g a n o r g a n iz e r/le a d e r , th e le a s t p o s s ib le u p w a r d a d ju s tm e n t inSection 3B1.1( c) doe s not specify a par ticular number

of par ticipants that an 3 org anizer/leader must have supervised for the two-leve l enhanc ement to attach, while § 3B 1.1(a) require s org anization or leadership over “ five or more par ticipants or was otherwise e x tensive” for a four- level enha

ncement. U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a) . 21 offe nse l evel un der § 3B 1. 1, despi t e the prob at i on offi ce r’ s r ec om m endi ng a f ou rl evel enhancem enti n A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s P S I. S ee U . S . S . G . § 3 B 1. 1(c) . 3 S i gni f i c a nt l y , “ [ w ] e ha ve r e c ogni z e d tha t‘ [ t ] he de f e nda ntdoe s notha ve t o be the s ol e l e a de rorki ngpi n of the c ons pi r a c y i n or de rt o be c ons i de r e d a n or ga ni z e ror l ea der w i thi n the m ea ni ng of the G ui del i nes’ and that‘ [b] ec ause the di stri ctcourt m u sti n t erp retth e fact o rs st at ed i n th e co m m en t ary, an d m u stex erci se i t s b est ju d g m e n t a s to th e ap p lic a tio n o f th e f a c ts to th e s e s ta n d a r d s , its d e c is io n is e n title d to one of de f e r e nc e on appe a l . ’ ” R e ndon, 354 F . 3d a t1332 ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) ( a l t e r a t i ons i n or i gi na l ) . W e a l s o ha ve uphe l d a § 3B 1. 1 e nha nc e m e ntw he n the conv i ct ed defendant“ had d ec i si on -m aki ng autho ri ty a nd exer ci se d con trol . ” U ni t ed S t a t e s v. S ua r e z , 313 F . 3d 1287, 1294 ( 11 C i r . 2002) , c e r t . de ni e d, 540 U . S . 828, th 12 4 S . C t . 55 (200 3). A ng ul o-Q ui no nes noton l y w as capt ai n o f the go -f as tbo at , bu tal so he kn ew the de s t i na t i on of

the boa tf

orde l i ve ry of

the c oc a i ne , w hi c h w a s nota de s t i na t i on of h i s ch o o si n g . H e w as fo l l o w i n g th e i n stru ct i o n s o f th e d ru g d eal ers as t o th e d el i v ery, and h e w as char ged w i th cal l i ng P es o t o d el i ver the bo atand i t s c ar go up on arri val at the appoi nt e d de s t i na t i on. H e a l s o w a s i n c ha r ge of hi s f ourc ode f

e nda nt s on the go-22

fa stbo atand o vers aw R am i re z w hi l e he drove the go -f as tbo atfor three t o si x h ou rs a s w e l l a s di r e c t e d R a m i r e z t o c ha nge a f ue l t a nk. I n a ddi t i on t o gi vi ng or de r s t o the f o u rc o d e f

e n d a n ts o n th e g o - f

a s t b o a t, A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s a le r te d h is c o d e f e n d a n ts to the pr e s e nc e the C oa s tG ua r d. A ngul o- Q ui none s a tt e m pt s t o di s t i ngui s h R e ndon, w he r e w e uphe l d s e nt e nc i ng e nha nc e m e nt s unde rboth § 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) a nd § 3B 1. 1, on the f a c t s by c ont e ndi ng tha tA ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s a c t i vi t i e s on the go- f a s tboa tw e r e r e l a t e d onl y t o hi s be i ng th e c ap ta in . W e h a v e r e c o u n te d h is c o n d u c t th a t s h o w e d h im to b e in c h a r g e o f h is codefendant s a nd ac t i ng as an organi ze r a nd l ea der und erdi re ct i on of the drug deal er s in a d d itio n to b e in g th e c ap ta in . I m p o r ta n tly , R e n d o n d o e s n o t h o ld th a t th e s p e c if ic f a c ts o f th a t c a s e a r e r e q u ir e d f o re n h a n c e m e n ts u n d e r§ § 2 D 1 .1 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ) a n d 3 B 1 .1 t o be appl i c abl e . T o the c ontr a ry , R e ndon pr ovi de s va r i ous f a c tua l c ons i de r a t i ons f

or the se nt enci ng courti n d ec i di ng w hether a§ 3 B 1. 1 enh ance m enti s app l i cabl e, such a s na tur e of

pa r t i c i pa t i on i n the c r i m i na l c onduc t , s c ope of the c r i m i na l a c t i vi ty , a nd “d e g r e e o f

c o n tr o l a n d a u th o r ity e x e r c is e d o v e ro th e r s ,” w h ic h a r e ap p lic ab le in th is c a s e . R e ndon, 354 F . 3d a t1332. T he r e i s no r e qui r e m e nttha ta l l the c ons i de r a t i ons have t o b e pre se nti n any on e c as e. R ather, R endo n m akes cl ea r thatthese fa ct ors a re m e r e l y c ons i de r a t i ons f orthe s e nt e nc i ng j udge , w ho m a ke s the f a c tua l de t e rm i na t i ons f orthe appl i c abi l i ty of

the § 3B 1. 1 e nha nc e m e nton a c a s e - by - c a s e ba s i s , a nd w e gi veTh efo llo winge xch ang eoc cur re d at Angulo -Quinon e s’ s sentenc ing re g ardingdo ub le 4 countingwith the resultingrec ognition that R endon wa s disposit ive: MR. AB RAMS [Angulo -Quinon e s’ s c ou ns e l]: And

so there ’sa

qu e sti on a bo ut a role adjustment under 3B 1.2, Ibelieve, or 1.1, and then there is a also, under 2D1.1, an enhancement beca use he w as the operator, thecaptain of a ve ssel involving the import or e xport of a c ontrolled substance . 23 de f e r e nc e t o the f

a c t f i ndi ngs of

the s e nt e nc i ng j udge . A c c or di ngl y , pa r s i ng the s pe c i f i c f a c t s of R e ndon c a nnotove r c om e the gove rni ng l a w tha tpe rm i t s va r i ous f a c tu a l s itu a tio n s to s h o w a n o r g a n iz e r/le a d e r s h ip r o le . W i th r e s pe c tt o doubl e c ount i ng, R e ndon di d hol d tha te nha nc e m e nt s unde r§§ 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) a nd 3B 1. 1 “ a r e notm utua l l y e xc l us i ve e nha nc e m e nt s unde rthe S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s . ” I d. a t1334. “ [ T ] he tw o e nha nc e m e nt s e m body

‘ c onc e ptua l l y s e pa r a t e not i ons r e l a t i ng t o s e nt e nc i ng’ be c a us e the y a r e de s i gne d f or tw o di f f e r e ntpurpos e s , ” a nd “ [ n] e i the rof the c ha l l e nge d gui de l i ne s i nc l ude s a ny la n g u a g e o rc o m m e n ta ryth a t s u g g e s ts th a t th e y m a y n o t b e ap p lie d c u m u la tiv e ly .” I d . D u r in g th e d is c u s s io n o f p o te n tia l d o u b le c o u n tin g a m o n g th e ju d g e a n d b o th c ouns e l a tA ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s s e nt e nc i ng, hi s c ouns e l c onc e de d tha the c oul d not d isti n g u ish R en d o n , w h ich re su lt ed in h is o b jectio n to A n g u lo -Q u in o n es ’s enhancem ent s und er§§ 2D 1. 1(b)(2)(B) and 3 B 1. 1 b ei ng ov errul ed. W e c on cl ud e 4THE COURT: Now I rec all. That’s onething that did bother me, Ms. Selmore [AU SA]. It se e ms l ikedo ub lepenalty, if you wi ll. MS. S ELMORE: Your Honor, a s Ilaid out in my response , and I

believe I cited an Eleventh Circuit decision to you, the dec ision of United States versus Rendon, it was a c ase de cided recently , actually in December of this year . THE COURT: Refre sh my rec ollection. What Iwant to know is, is that caseon po int ? MS. S ELMORE: It’s direc tly on point, Your Honor. T H EC O URT : D i re c t ly? M S . S E LM O RE : D i re c t ly. T HEC OU RT : Wh atwa s th e h o l di n g? MS. S ELMORE: The holding w as that under the guidelines it is not considered do ub lec ountingfo r t

hede fendant to re c e ivetheenh anc e ment f or be inga c a ptain as we ll as a leader/org anizer. There is no provision in the guidelines stating that you cannot a

pply both of those enha

ncements. Basic ally, the Court conclude d that it was totally

proper that both enhanc ement[s] apply in a factual patter

n e xac tly likethi s o ne . It w a s a

Title46 c a sein which th ede fendant in th at c a se was stopped on the high seas — THE COURT: Irec all that now. You re ad that; ca n you distinguish it, Mr. Abrams? Becandid. MR. ABRAMS: No, sir. TH E CO URT: Ilikeyour p ro fe ssi on alis m. I c ouldn ’t e ith er, havingthat re fre sh my rec ollection. That objec tion will be overruled. R8 at 3-4 (emphasis added) . 24 tha tthe s e nt e nc i ng j udge c orr e c t l y de t e rm i ne d tha tR e ndon c ontr ol s A ngul oQ ui none s ’ s doubl e - c ount i ng c ha l l e nge . I n c onf i rm i ng the appr opr i a t e ne s s of both of these se nt enci ng enhancem ent s, w e not e thatthe j ud ge consi dere d the re qu es tof A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s c ouns e l tha the be gi ve n the l ow e s t , ortw o- l e ve l i ns t e a d of theTh esentenc ingdis cus sio n c on c erningthe§ 3 B 1. 1 enh anc e ment c ontin ue d a s f oll ow s: 5 MR. AB RAMS: Judg e , c an I jus t a sk , ju st in a

matter o f p oints, with respec t to the leader ship role, the PSIassigned a f our-leve l enhanc ement to the leadership roleand one of the items that we reque sted, based on thefac ts of this case, wa s that Your Honor consider just applying a

two-leve l enhanc ement for role if Your Honor found a

leadership role to be a

ppropriate . THE COURT: Yes. I

am g oing to do that. I

rec all that now. That would g ive us a two-level re duction. That would then avoid the lif eterm . MR. ABRAMS: Yes, sir. R8 at 7. 25 f o u r - le v e l e n h a n c e m e n t, u n d e r§ 3 B 1 .1 a n d d e te rm in e d th a t w a s th e ap p r o p r ia te enhancem ent . C om pare § 3 B 1. 1(a) w i th § 3B 1. 1(c) . W hi l e w e have det erm i ned

5 thatthe enhancem ent s und er§§ 2D 1. 1(b)(2)(B) and 3 B 1. 1 w er e app ropri at el y app l i ed a nd tha tthe di s tr i c tj udge di d e xe r c i s e di s c r e t i on i n s e nt e nc i ng a tthe l ow e s tl e ve l of e nha nc e m e nt , w e ne ve r the l e s s pe rm i tthe j udge t o r e vi s i tthi s a s pe c tof A ngul oQ ui none s ’ s s e nt e nc e pur s ua ntt o ourr e m a nd f orr e s e nt e nc i ng unde rU ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . __, 125 S . C t . 738 ( 2005) , a s w e e xpl a i n i n the f ol l ow i ng s e c t i on a ddr e s s i ng pl a i n- e rr ora na l y s i s . W hi l e the e nha nc e m e ntf orbe i ng c apt a i n of

the gof a s t b o a t a n d b e in g a n o r g a n iz e r/le a d e ris ap p lic ab le to A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s f o rh is cond ucti n the att em pt ed i m po rt at i on of the subj ec tcoca i ne, w e c anno tbe ce rt ai n that the di s tr i c tj udge w oul d ha ve gi ve n A ngul o- Q ui none s the s e e nha nc e m e nt s f ol l ow i ng B oo ker, and w e w anthi m t o revi si tthese enhancem ent s f or A ng ul o-Q ui no nes w hen26

he r e s e nt e nc e s A ngul o- Q ui none s a nd R a m i r e z on r e m a nd f orthe a m ountorw e i ghtof c o c a in e in v o lv e d , w h ic h w e e x p la in in th e n e x t s e c tio n . F . P la in - E rr o rA n a ly s is A m on g A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s app el l at e i ss ues w as thathi s s ent ence enhancem ent s vi ol at ed hi s S i xth A m endm entri gh t s bec ause they w er e nei ther c ha r ge d i n the i ndi c tm e ntorpr ove d t o a j ury , a nd he r e l i e d on B l a ke l y v. W as hi ng t on , 54 2 U . S . 29 6, 12 4 S . C t . 25 31 (200 4). T hese al l eged un const i tut i on al enhancem ent s w er e hi s e nh ance m ent s f or bei ng capt ai n o f the go -f as tbo at , bei ng an organi ze r/ l ea der, and the am ou ntof cocai ne i nv ol ved. O ri gi nal l y, R am i re z c ert i fi ed to th is c o u r t th a t n o is s u e r e g a r d in g s e n te n c in g w o u ld b e r a is e d in h is ap p e a l, a n d h is s e nt e nc i ng pr oc e e di ng w a s nottr a ns c r i be d. S ubs e que nt l y , R a m i r e z m ove d t o a dopt A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s s e nt e nc i ng i s s ue s , the onl y one of w hi c h appl i e d t o hi m w a s the a m ountof

c oc a i ne i nvol ve d. W e or de r e d tha tR a m i r e z ’ s s e nt e nc i ng pr oc e e di ng be tr a n s c r ib e d s o th a t w e c o u ld r e v ie w it. A ddi t i ona l l y , the S upr e m e C our tde c i de d B ooke r , w hi c h e xt e nds B l a ke l y , a nd h o l d s th atth e S i x th A m en d m en ti s v i o l at ed w h en a sen t en ci n g j u d g e en h an ces a s e n te n c e b a s e d o n f

a c ts f o u n d b y th e ju d g e u n d e rS e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s b e lie v e d to be m a nda t ory , a nd thos e f a c t s w e r e nota dm i tt e d by the c onvi c t e d de f e nda ntorf

ound by the j ury . F ol l ow i ng B ooke r , ourc our ti s s ue d U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R odr i gue z , 398 F . 3d27

1 2 9 1 ( 1 1 th C i r . ) , c e r t . d e n i e d , __U. S . __ , 1 2 5 S . C t . 2 9 3 5 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . I n R o d r i g u e z , we re cogn i ze d thatpl ai n-error a nal ys i s gov erns ou r r evi ew of al l eged se nt enci ng errors s uc h a s A ngul o- Q ui none s a nd R odr i gue z r a i s e i n thi s appe a l be c a us e the i robj e c t i ons w e r e notm a de i n di s tr i c tc our t . I d. a t1298. U nde rthi s r e vi e w s t a nda r d, w e c a nnot c o rr e c t a n e rr o rth a t th e c o n v ic te d d e f e n d a n t f a ile d to r a is e in d is tr ic t c o u r t, u n le s s it i s “ ‘ ( 1) e rr or , ( 2) tha ti s pl a i n, a nd ( 3) tha ta f f e c t s s ubs t a nt i a l r i ght s . ’ ” I d. ( c i t a t i on o m i tt ed ). If al l o f th ese co n d i t i o n s are sat i sfi ed , th en w e h av e d i scret i o n t o ad d ress a f o r f e ite d e rr o r“‘o n ly if

( 4 ) th e e rr o rs e r io u s ly a f f e c ts th e f a irn e s s , in te g r ity , o rp u b lic re pu t at i on of j ud i ci al proceedi ng s. ’ ” I d. (c i t at i on om i tt ed). C on ce rni ng the thi rd part of the pl ai n-error a nal ys i s, the defendanthas the bu rden of persuas i on as t o p re j ud i ce r e s u ltin g f

r o m th e c h a lle n g e d s e n te n c in g e rr o r . I d . a t 1 2 9 9 . A ft erB oo ker i ss ued, coun se l for A ng ul o-Q ui no nes a nd the go vernm entas ked thi s c our tt o va c a t e hi s s e nt e nc e unde rthe S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s be c a us e the s e nt e nc i ng j udge s t a t e d tha the w a s bound by the S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s t o gi ve A n g u lo -Q u in o n es a s en ten ce th at h e d idn o t w an t t o g iv e h im . B as ed o n th e ju d g e’s com m ent s a tse nt enci ng , the go vernm entst at ed thatA ng ul o-Q ui no nes c an de m ons tr a t e the thi r d pa r tof the pl a i n- e rr ora na l y s i s a nd a r guabl y c a n s ubs t a nt i a t e the f our th pa r tof

the a na l y s i s by s how i ng a n e rr ortha ta f f e c t e d the f

a i rne s s , i nt e gr i ty , or pu bl i c r eput at i on of the se nt enci ng proceedi ng s. T here fore , the go vernm entagre ed28

thata r em and i s w arra nt ed t o g i ve the di stri ctj ud ge the op po rtun i ty t o rec on si der A ng ul o-Q ui no nes’ s s ent ence un der B oo ker. C on se qu ent l y, the go vernm entst at ed tha tA ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s s e nt e nc e e vi de nc e d c ons t i tut i ona l e rr ori n vi ol a t i on of the S ix th A m en d m en t as w ell as s tatu to ry er ro r r es u lt in g fr o m th e s en ten cin g ju d g e’s m i st ak en b el i ef th atth e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es w ere m an d at o ry i n st ead o f ad v i so ry, a s B ooke rhol ds . O urr e vi e w of A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s s e nt e nc i ng tr a ns c r i ptr e ve a l s the j u d g e’ s ex p l i ci tv i ew th atth e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es w ere m an d at o ry:

W el l , l etm e m ake one ob se rvat i on , and I m ake i tfor w ho ever r e a ds thi s , f

orthe i rbe ne f

i ta s w e l l , a nd I i nc l ude the m e m be r s of the E le v e n th C ir c u it, th e ju d ic ia l m e m b e r s o f th a t C o u r t o f

A p p e a l. If ev er th ere w as fo rm o v er su b st an ce, th atd i sag reem en ti s a pr i m e e xa m pl e he r e . W e ’ r e l ooki ng a ta de f e nda ntw ho i s 62 y e a r s of ag e. I h av e a feeli n g th atev en i f I g av e h i m l ess th an 3 6 0 m o n th s, w ha t e ve rI w oul d gi ve hi m w oul d, f ora l l pr a c t i c a l purpos e s , pr obabl y be lif e , f o rth e p r o b ab ilitie s a r e g r e a t th a t h e w ill le a v e th is lif e w h ile s till in pr i s on. V e ry c a ndi dl y , i f I ha d a ny di s c r e t i on i n thi s m a tt e r , tha ta ge w ou l d m ake adi ff

er ence i n m y s ent enci ng , bu tagai n, I’ m al so re m i nd ed th a t m e m b e r s o f

C o n g r e s s , in c lu d in g M r . F e e n e y , w o u ld ta k e w h a t little di sc re t i on w e have aw ayfr om us so thatw e have non e. V ery w el l . I w i l l no ti nv i t e a rgum entfor obv i ou sl y I w i l l se nt ence th e d e f e n d a n t a t w h a t is n o w th e lo w e n d o f th e g u id e lin e s .

. . . .

. . . . M r. [A ng ul o-] Q ui no nes, l etm e a dv i se you thatyour use of the t erm “ fa i r” un fortun at el y w i l l pl ayno parti n the se nt ence thatI w i l l i m po se , for m y opi ni on coun t s a s nothi ng i n these proceedi ng s. W e have w hat ar e kno w n as s ent enci ng gu i del i nes a nd I m ustac ce pttho se gu i del i nes w he the rI a gr e e w i th the m ornot , f ori f I f a i l t o do s o the n I w oul d be v io la tin g th e la w . L e tm e a s s ur e y ou tha ti f I ha d di s c r e t i on i n thi s m a tt e r , the pr obabi l i t i e s a r e gr e a ttha ty ou w oul d r e a l i z e y ourw i s h, tha ti s , t o be a m ong thos e w ho a r e ne a ra nd de a rt o y ou a nd w ho pe rhaps ne e d y our29

pres ence , bu tagai n, I poi ntou tthatun der our sy st em I don ’ thave that ki nd of di s c r e t i on.

. . . . I th i n k i tp r o b ab l y i s o n l y ap p r o p r i a t e t o t e l l y o u , i n my c o n f e r e n c e w ith th e p r o b a tio n o f f ic e rin th is c a s e , w h o is c h a r g e d w ith the re spon si bi l i ty of pre pari ng a r eportfor thi s C ou rtw hi ch i ncl ud ed y o u rb a c k g r o u n d , m a tte r s ab o u t y o u rf a m ily a n d th in g s o f

th a t n a tu r e , I a d v is e d th e p r o b a tio n o f f ic e rth a t if

I c o u ld , I w o u ld s e n d y o u b a c k to C o l o m b i a b ecau se th e t erm th atI w i l l h av e t o i m p o se u p o n yo u , u n l ess s o m e h ig h e ra u th o r ity in te rv e n e s , w ill e s s e n tia lly m e a n th a t y o u w ill pr obabl y ne ve rgo ba c k t o y ourhom e l a nd a ga i n, a nd a s I a dvi s e d the pr oba t i on of

f i c e r , tha ts e e m s t o m e t o be a gr e a tw a s t e , nots o m uc h f r om the s t a ndpoi ntof

c om pa s s i on f

ory ou, butbe c a us e of

the e xpe ns e , the fa nt as t i c s um of m on eythati ti s goi ng t o costt o t ake c ar e of y ou , fe ed y o u f o rth e r e s t o f

y o u rlif e p r o b ab ly . I n a n y e v e n t, I w is h y o u w e ll. R 8 a t 8 - 9 , 1 1 - 1 2 ( e m p h a s is a d d e d ) . S i m i l a r l y , i n s e nt e nc i ng R a m i r e z , the di s tr i c tj udge s t a t e d i n r e s pons e t o the go vernm ent ' s i nform i ng thata s ent ence atthe l ow end o f the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes w o u ld n o t b e o p p o s e d :

V e ry w e l l . T ha nk y ou, M s . S e l m or e . W e l l , tha t ’ s one of the m a tte r s th a t m a k e s o u rs y s te m o f s e n te n c in g q u ite s e v e r e . I w o u ld c o n s id e rth e a g e o f

th e d e f e n d a n t a s w e ll a s th e n o p r io rc o n v ic tio n s . U nf or tuna t e l y , i n c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e s , i n m os ti ns t a nc e s i t ’ s the w e i ght thatl ar gel y det erm i nes the se nt ence .

. . . . W e l l , obvi ous l y the C our tw i l l i nde e d s e nt e nc e thi s de f e nda nta tthe l ow end o f the gu i del i ne ra ng e. 2d S upp. R . 1 a t3- 4. T he r e f or e , w e va c a t e both A ngul o- Q ui none s a nd R a m i r e z ’ s s e nt e nc e s a s t o the am ou ntor w ei gh tof cocai ne i nv ol ved and re m and for res ent enci ng un der B oo ker30

perm i tt i ng the se nt enci ng j ud ge t o u se the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes a s a dv i soryra ther tha n a s m a nda t ory . N one the l e s s , the di s tr i c tj udge on r e m a nd i s r e qui r e d " t o t a ke ac coun tof the G ui del i nes t og ether w i th o ther s ent enci ng go al s. " B oo ker, 54 3 U . S . at

__, 125 S . C t . a t764 ( c i t i ng 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) ) . A s w e e xpl a i ne d i n the pr e c e di ng s e c t i on a ddr e s s i ng A ngul o- Q ui none s ’ s e nha nc e m e nt s unde r§§ 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) a nd 3B 1. 1, w hi l e w e c on cl ud e thatthey w er e app l i ed approp ri at el y, the di stri ctj ud ge m ay rev i si tth o se en h an cem en t s t o A n g u l o -Q u i n o n es’ s sen t en ce u n d er B o o k er o n th i s r e m a n d f o rr e s e n te n c in g . I I I . CONCL US I ON A n g u lo - Q u in o n e s a n d R a m ir e z h a v e r a is e d v a r io u s is s u e s r e la tin g to th e ir c onvi c t i on a nd s e nt e nc i ng f orthe i rpa r t i c i pa t i on i n the a tt e m pt e d i m por t a t i on of coca i ne i nt o the U ni t ed S t at es . A s w e have expl ai ned h er ei n, thei r app el l at e i ss ues concerni ng thei r c on vi ct i on s a re A FFI R M ED . T hei r s ent ence s, ho w ever , ar e VA C A TED a nd R EM A N D ED f orthe l i m i t e d purpos e of r e s e nt e nc i ng i n vi e w of B o o k e r .