FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T FEB 8, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 11 75 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 5 :1 0- cr-0 00 12 -WT M-J EG-4 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us

JOSE IGNACI O BUSTOS-NUNEZ, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e So ut he rnDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Feb ru ary 8, 2 01 2) Befo re CARNES, HULL andW ILSON, Cir cu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM:Afte r pl ead in g g ui lt y , Defen da ntJo se Ign aci o B us to s- Nun ez ap pe al s h is 51
-

m on th sen te nc e fo r co ns pi racy to p os se ss with i nt en t t o d is tri bu te ap pr ox im at el y 18 6 p ou nd s o f m ari

juan a, in vi ol at io n o f 21 U.S.C. §§ 84 1( a)(1 ) an d 8 46 . After rev ie w, we affi rm . I. BACKG ROUND On ap pe al , Bus to s- Nun ez ar gu es th atth e d is tri ctco urt erro ne ou sl y ap pl ie d a th ree- le ve l m an ag eri al -ro le en hanc em en t, p ur su an t t o U.S.S.G. § 3B 1.1 (b ), witho utfir stres ol vi ng di sp ut edfactua l p orti on s o f th e Pre se nt en ce In ve st ig at io n Rep ort (“ PSI” ). See Fe de ral Ru le of C riminal Pro cedur e 3 2( i)( 3) (B). Th e fat al 1 pr ob le m forBu st os -Nune z is th athe adm it te d c ert ai n fa ct s i n h is pl ea h eari ng an d di d n otch al le ng e o th er re co un te d fa ct s i n t he PSI. Tho se un di sp ut edfact s, t ak en to ge th er, are su ffi ci en t t o s up po rt t he rol e en ha nc em en t. We exp la in why. A. Rol e Enh an cement The is su e in vo lv es a m an ag eri al -ro le en ha nc em en t u nd er U.S.S.G.
Rule 32(i)(3) (B ) provides: 1 At sentenc ing, the court:

. . . (B ) must—for any

disputed portion of the presentenc e report or other controverte d matter—rule on the dispute or deter mine that a ruling is unnece ssary either beca use the matter will not aff

ect sentenc ing, or beca

use the court will not consider the matter in sentencing ; . . . . Fe d. R. Crim. P . 32(i)(3) (B ). 2§ 3 B1 .1(b ), whi chpro vi de s t he de fen da nt ’s off en se lev el is in crea se d b y th ree le ve ls if h e “ was a m an ag er o r supe rv is or(bu t n otanorg an iz er o r le ad er) a ndth e cri m in al act iv it y

in vo lv edfiv e o r m or e p art ic ip an ts or wa s o th erwi se ex te ns iv e.” U.S.S.G. § 3 B1 .1(b ). To qua li fy forth e en ha nc em en t, the de fen da ntne edon ly
m an ag e o r supe rv is e o ne ot he r pa rti ci pa nt . Id. § 3B 1.1 , cmt. n .2. Defe nd an t Bu st os -Nune z h as ne ve r di sp ut edth atth e m ari juan a co ns pi racy hadat l eas t fi ve pa rti ci pa nt s. We thus tu rnto th e o th er u nd is pu te d fa ct s i n the pl ea h eari ng . B. Plea Hea ri ng Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z an d fi ve co de fen da nt s— Ju anCan o, M arco Riv era, Germ anOrte ga -Fl or es , Gabr ie l Sanc he z-Ce rv an te s an d Gab rie l Sa nc he z-Go m ez— were ch arg edwith c on sp iri ng to po ss es s 1 86 po un ds of m ari juan a wit h t he in te nt to di st rib ut e. Defen dantBu st os -Nune z p le d g ui lt y pu rs ua ntto a pl ea ag reem en t. At the pl ea h eari ng , th e g ov ern m en t ca ll edAgen t St ep he n B . Tin sl ey of t he Dru g En fo rcem en t Ag en cy (“ DEA”) to tes ti fy

as t o t he factua l b as is forBu st os Nun ez’s p le a. Agen t Ti ns le y tes ti fie d t ha t the DEA inv es ti ga te d am ari juan a di st rib ut io n s ch em e le d b y Pedro Bu st os , Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z’s br ot he r. Whi le co nduc ti ng su rv ei ll an ce o f a res id en ce i n Ni ch ol ls , Geor gi a, ag en ts ob se rv edDefen da ntBu st os -Nune z wal ki ng aro un d a53 -fo ottra il er. The ne xtda y ,

“ oc cupa nt s an d o th er co de fen da nt s” un lo ad edat l eas t 1 86 po un ds of m ari juan a, 3whi chwas s ub se qu en tl y bro ke n d own an d re pa ck ag edforde li ve ry . After t he su rv ei ll an ce, ag en ts co nduc te d atra ffi c st op an d s ei zed17 6 p ou nd s o f m ari juan a in a ve hi cl e driv enby D efen dantBu st os -Nune z. Acco rd in g t o Ag en t Ti ns le y , th e DEA’ s i nv es ti ga ti onsh owe d t ha t Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z “ was th e p ers onwho was i n c ha rg e o f th e d is tri bu ti on of th is pa rti cu la r lo adof m ari juan a as far as rel at edto hi s o th er co de fen da nt s.” Age ntTin sl ey

ex pl ai ne d t ha t Def

en da ntBu st os -Nune z “ was sen t h ere b y hi s br ot he r’s or ga ni zat io n t o o ve rs ee the un lo ad in g a ndth e rep ack ag in g, an d m ak in g su re tha t i t g otdi st rib ut edth ro ug h o th er co de fen dant s t o t he rig htpe op le , andth en Mr. Nu ne z was supp os edto be inch arg e o f co ll ect in g t he dru g p ro ceed s t o b e se nt ba ckto Mex ic o.” Whe n t he di st ric t co urt as ke d Def en da ntBu st os -Nune z whe th er h e ag reed with Ag en t Ti ns le y ’s tes ti m on y , Bus to s- Nun ez re pl ie d, “ Yes , You r Hon or .” Thu s, Bu st os -Nune z’s adm it te d fa ct s i n t he pl ea h eari ng are s uf fic ie ntto supp ort the rol e en ha nc em en t, b utth ere i s m or e. C. PSI’ s Fa ctua l Su m m ar y The PSI co nt ai ne d t hi s fa ctua l s umm ary ab ou t Def en da ntBu st os -Nune z’s of fen se co nduc t. Whil e h e o bjec te d t o c ert ai n s ta te m en ts , he d idno t o bjec t t o t he fo ll owi ng fact s. 4Fi rs t, DEA ag en ts pl acedth e res id en ce i n Ni ch ol ls , Geor gi a und er

su rv ei ll an ce af

te r rec ei vi ng in fo rm at io n t ha t i t was be in g u se d t o s to re dru gs . The n, o n Ap ril 7, 2 01 0, ag en ts no ti ceda 53 -fo otcar- haul er p ark edne ar the rear do orof the res id en ce. Thr ou gh ou t the ni gh t, ag en ts saw s ev eral pe op le lo okat an d t ou chth e fro ntof t he car h au le r. The ne xtda y , age nt s wat ch eda Je ep Ch ero ke e le av e th e res id en ce af te r a ba g was lo ad edin to it . Later, the Jee p C he ro ke e returne d t o t he res id en ce, an ot he r ba g was lo ad edin to th e v eh ic le , anditde parte d a ga in . Cod efen dantRiv era dro ve th e Je ep Ch ero ke e, an d c od efen da ntOrte ga -Fl or es was apa ss en ge r. As ag en ts in it ia te d atra ffi c st op , Riv era u se d h is cel l p ho ne . Once t he Jee p C he ro ke e was st op pe d, ag en ts sea rch edth e v eh ic le an d fo un d t enpo un ds of m ari juan a. App ro xi m at el y

on e h ou r la te r, ag en ts watc he d a s Def en da ntBu st os -Nune z ex it edth e Nic ho ll s re si de nc e, lo ad eda su it cas e an d fo urgarb ag e b ag s i nt o t he tru nkof aNis sa n Al ti m a, an d d ep art ed . Agen ts pe rfo rm eda tr affi c st op onth e Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z’s Nis sa n Al ti m a, se arch edth e v eh ic le an d fo un d 1 76 po un ds of m ari

juan a. Bac k a t the res id en ce, ag en ts saw c od efen da nt s Sa nc he z-Ce rv an te s an d San ch ez-Go m ez wo rk in g o n t he car- haul er an d p ut ti ng a co m pa rtment b ack to ge th er. A subs eque ntin sp ect io n o f th e car -h au le r rev eal editwas c on st ru ct ed 5with h ol lo w tubi ng th atha d b een us edto st or e th e m ari juan a. In si de th e res id en ce, ag en ts fou ndpa ck in g m at eri al s, s uc h a s p la st ic wrap , tap e, ba gs an d s cal es . Late r, co de fen da ntCan o a dm it te d t ha t co de fen da ntSan ch ez-Go m ez recrui te d h im

to tra ns po rt t he m ari

juan a b etweenGeor gi a an d Tex as us in g a Dod ge tru ckan d t he car- haul er. San ch ez-Go m ez ad m it te d t ha t h e was act in g a t th e d ire ct io n o f Defen dantBu st os -Nune z’s br othe r in Mex ic o. Sa nc he z-Go m ez al so adm it te d h el pi ng Defen dantBu st os -Nune z an d Ort eg a-Fl or es un lo adth e m ari juan a fro m

th e car -h au le r. Onc e th e m ari

juan a was in si de th e res id en ce, Defe nd an t Bu st os -Nune z an d Orte ga -Fl or es trans ferr edth e m ari juan a in to sep arat e b ag s. Whil e San ch ez-Go m ez an d h is so n, Sa nc he z-Ce rv an te z, were o ut si de fix in g t he car- haul er, Defe nd an t Bu st os -Nune z le ft t he res id en ce, p uta ba g c on ta in in g m on ey ina Nis sa n t ru ckan d dr ov e away. San ch ez-Go m ez l at er l earn edth atDefen da ntBu st os -Nune z h ad rece iv eda cal l ad vi si ng hi m to lea ve th e res id en ce b ecau se co de fen da nt s R iv era an d Ort eg a-Fl or es ha d b een st op pe d b y law en fo rcem en t. Ina subs eque ntin te rv ie w, Orteg a-Fl or es st at edth atDefen da ntBu st os Nun ez as ke d h im

to pi ckup a Je ep Ch ero ke e in Atl an taan d t ran sp ort i t t o

“ so m eo ne to tak e so m ewh ere,” th enlat er i ns tru ct edOrte ga -Fl or es to dri ve th e Je ep Ch ero ke e to th e Nic ho ll s, Geo rg iares id en ce wh ere R iv era p la ceda ba g i n t he 6car. Bu st os -Nune z th ento ldOrte ga -Fl or es to awai t fu rth er i ns tru ct io ns fro m hi m (Bu st os -Nune z). D. Dis pute d Fac tua l Po rti on s o f the PSI The PSI d idreco un t s ta te m en ts of c od efen da nt s R iv era a ndSan ch ez-Go m ez to whi chDefen da ntBu st os -Nune z o bjec te d. Sp eci fic al ly, th e PSI a ll eg edth at : (1 ) San ch ez-Go m ez s ta te d h e le arn edDefen da ntBu st os -Nune z was lo cal ly in ch arg e of ov ers eei ng th e unl oa di ng an d s afek eep in g o f th e m ari juan a as well as c ol le ct in g th e m on ey ; an d (2 ) Ri ve ra s ta te d t ha t Def en dantBu st os -Nune z in st ru ct edRiv era to tra ve l t o t he Jac ks on vi ll e, Fl or id a ai rp ort t o p ic k up S an ch ez-C erv an te s an d San ch ez-Go m ez an d t ha t Ri ve ra b el ie ve d c od efen da ntOrte ga -Fl or es was wo rk in g un de r Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z’s di rect io n. E. Sect io n 3 B1 .1(b ) Rol e Enh an cement The PSI re co m

m en de d t ha t Def

en dantBu st os -Nune z rec ei ve a th ree- le ve l en ha nc em en t p ur su an t t o U.S.S.G. § 3B 1.1 (b ) fo r hi s ro le as am an ag er o r supe rv is orof t he m ari

juan a co ns pi racy. Defen da ntBu st os -Nune z fi le d awrit te n ob jecti onch al le ng in g t he § 3 B1 .1(b ) ro le en ha nc em en t. The writ te n o bjec ti on di d no t d is pu te m os t o f th e PSI’s o ffen se co nduc t, b utdi d d is pu te th e ab ov e-re co un te d st at em en ts of S an ch ez-Go m ez an d R iv era. Ho wev er, the writ te n o bjec ti on di d n ot di sp ut e Ort eg a-Fl or es ’s st at em en t tha t h e was fol lo win g Def en da ntBu st os 7Nun ez’s i ns tru ct io ns to dri ve a Je ep Ch ero ke e to pi ck up Riv era, wh o l oa de d aba g in to th e v eh ic le . F. Sent enci ng Hea ri ng At s en te nc in g, the di st ric t co urt o ve rru le d B us to s- Nun ez’s o bjec ti on to th e ro le en ha nc em en t, s ta ti ng th atitag reedwith t he PSI. The di st ric t co urt ca lc ul at ed th e ad vi so ry

gu id el in es ran ge of 5 1 t o 6 3 m on th s an d a ll owe d B us to s- Nun ez t o al lo cu te . Defen se co un se l m ad e arg um en ts inm it ig at io n a ndask edfora se nt en ce atth e lo w endof t he gu id el in es ran ge . The d is tri ctco urt the n a sk edde fen se co un se l wh ethe r th ere was “ an yth in g e ls e.” Defen se co un se l s ai d n o. Afte r im po si ng a 51 -m on th sen te nc e, th e d is tri ctco urt as ke d d efen se co un se l wh ethe r th ere was an y ot he r ob jecti on to th e co urt’s “ fin di ng s o f fac t, co nc lu si on s o f la w, or m an ne r in whi chth e se nt en ce was pro no un ced ,” an d de fen se co un se l ag ai n s ai d n o. Bu st os -Nune z fi le d t hi s ap pe al . II . DISCUSSI ON At s en te nc in g, the go ve rn m en t m us t p ro ve by a prep on de ran ce o f th e ev id en ce the fact s s up po rti ng an y gu id el in es en ha nc em en ts . Uni te d S ta te s v . Ndi ay e, 43 4 F .3d12 70 , 13 00 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). The d efen da nt ’s fai lu re t o o bjec t to a factua l al le ga ti on inth e PSI c on st itut es anadm is si on forsen te nc in g p ur po se s. Uni te d S ta te s v . W ad e, 45 8 F .3d12 73 , 12 77 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). Thu s, the 8se nt en ci ng co urt m ay rel y on un di sp ut edst at em en ts inth e PSI “ de sp it e th e ab se nc e o f supp orti ng ev id en ce.” Un it edSta te s v . Lop ez-Ga rci a, 56 5 F .3d13 06 , 13 23 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ). If, o n t he othe r hand , th e d efen da ntob jects to factua l s ta te m en ts inth e PSI, th e g ov ern m en t’s b ur de n t o p ro ve th os e d is pu te d fa ct s i s t rig ge red . Uni te d S ta te s v. Lawre nc e, 47 F.3d15 59 , 15 66 (11 th Cir . 19 95 ). Und er Ru le 32 (i) (3 )(B) , th e di st ric t co urt m

us t the n “ ru le on th e d is pu te or d et erm in e th ata ru li ng is un ne ces sary

eit he r be cau se th e m at te r wil l n otaffe ctsen te nc in g, o r be cau se th e co urt wi ll no t co ns id er the m atte r in sen te nc in g.” Fed . R. Cri m . P. 32 (i) (3 )(B) . In res ol vi ng th e fac tu al di sp ut e, th e d is tri ctco urt m ay co ns id er the de fen da nt ’s adm is si on s atth e p le a h eari ng . See Un it edSta te s v . Mart in ez, 5 84 F.3d10 22 , 10 27 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ); Lawr en ce, 4 7 F .3dat 1 56 8; Uni te d S ta te s v . W il so n, 8 84 F.2 d 1 35 5, 1 35 6 (1 1t h C ir. 1 98 9) . Here, Bu st os -Nune z’s writ te n o bjec ti on di d d is pu te so m e o f th e PSI f actua l al le ga ti on s re la ti ng to Bu st os -Nune z’s ro le inth e o ffen se , sp eci fic al ly the st at em en ts of c od efen da nt s R iv era a ndSan ch ez-Go m ez. At s en te nc in g, the di st ric t co urt d idno t re so lv e th e fac tu al di sp ut e. Howev er, an y all eg ederro r in th atreg ardwas h arm le ss be cau se un di sp ut edfact s amply sup po rte d t he di st ric t co urt’s fi nd in g t ha t Bu st os -Nune z m an ag edor s up erv is edat l eas t o ne pa rti ci pa nt 9in th e m ari

juan a co ns pi racy. 2 Fi rs t, athi s p le a h eari ng , Bus to s- Nun ez ad m it te d t ha t: (1) he was s en t t o Nich ol ls , Geor gi a “by his bro th er’s o rg an iz at io n t o o ve rs ee the un lo ad in g a ndth e rep ack ag in g, an d m ak in g s ur e th atitgo t d is tri bu te d thr ou gh ot he r co de fen da nt s t o th e ri gh t p eo pl e,” an d (2 ) he “ was th e p ers on who was i n c ha rg e o f th e d is tri bu ti on of th is parti cu la r lo adof m ari juan a as far as rel at edto hi s co de fen da nt s.” Seco nd , Bus to s- Nun ez d idno t o bjec t t o t he st at em en ts of Ort eg a-Fl or es in th e PSI, wh ic h s ho wed : (1 ) Bu st os -Nune z d ire ct edhi m to dri ve a ve hi cl e to Nich ol ls , Geor gi a, whe re co de fen dantRiv era p la ceda ba g i ns id e, an d (2 ) th en Bu st os -Nune z to ldOrte ga -Fl or es to awai t fu rth er d ire ct io ns . Accor di ng to ot he r un di sp ut edfact s i n t he PSI, Ri ve ra an d Ort eg a-Fl or es were u nd er s urve il la nc e at th e ti m e. Whe n a ge nt s i ni ti at eda tr affi c st op , th ey di sc ov eredth atth e b ag co nt ai ne d t enpo un ds of m ari juan a. Thes e und is pu te d fa ct s s ho w th at , at a m in im um , Bus to s- Nun ez s up erv is edOrte ga -Fl or es , on e o f th e co ns pi racy’ s pa rti ci pa nt s.

We note that at the sente ncinghearing the district court indicate d that Bustos-Nune z’s 2 objection to the § 3B 1.1(b) r ole enha nceme nt was a le g al objection, not a f actua l one. B ustosNunez had at lea st two opportunities to correc t the district court or r aise a Rule 32(i)(3) (B ) objection, but did not do so. Thus, there is a que stion as to whether B ustos-Nunez proper ly prese rved this issue. In any event, we need not r eac h this iss ue bec ause the failure to resolve these disputes is harmless g iven other f acts, whic h Bustos-Nune z did notdispute, support the role e nhance ment. 10Fo r th es e rea so ns , we fin d n o re ve rs ib le erro r in th e d is tri ctco urt’s

im po si ti on of the th ree- le ve l m an ag eri al -ro le enha nc em en t p ur su an t t o U.S.S.G. § 3 B1 .1(b ). W e aff

irm Bu st os -Nune z’s 51 -m on th sen te nc e. AFFIRMED.

11