2003 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit
5-14-2003 

# U S A v . B a e z P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t 02-2038

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s at : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2003

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2003 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min . C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" U SA v . B a ez " (2003). 2003 D e cisio n s . P ape r 557. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2003/557NOT PRE CEDENT IAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE TH IRD CIR CU IT
No. 02-2038

UNITED S TATES OF AMERI CA

v. CARLOS BAEZ,

Appellant

On A ppeal from the Un ited States District Co urt for the Easte rn D istrict of P enns ylvania D.C. CriminalNo. 01-cr- 00529-01 (Hon orable H arvey Bartle, III)

Submitte d Pursuant to Third Circ uit LAR 34.1(a)

April 22, 2003 Be for e: S CIR ICA , Chief Judge *, A M BR O a nd W EIS , Circu it Judges (Fil ed May 14, 2003)

OPINI ON OF THE COURT

*Judge Scirica began hi s term as Chief Judge on May 4, 2003.1 The substantive offense s of convict ion were: – C oun t 7 – d istribution of p henc yclidine (P CP ) with in 1,00 0 fee t of a sc hoo l, in violation of 21 U.S.C . § 860(a); – C oun ts 9, 15 and 1 7 – d istribution of co caine with in 1,00 0 fee t of a sc hoo l, in violation of 21 U.S.C . § 860(a); – C oun t 19 – poss ession with intent to distribu te mo re than 500 gram s of P P w ithin 1,000 feet

of a school, in viol ation of 21 U.S.C. § 860(a ); and – Count 21 – possess ion with i ntent to dist ribut e cocaine wit

hin 1,000 fe et of a school, in violation o f 21 U .S.C. § 860 (a). The p ar ti es agr eedth atth e of fen se s i nvo lv ed 3 ,8 96 g ra ms o f PCP and 2, 350 gr ams of coca ine, and that the o ffenses too k place w ithin 1,000 fee t of a pub lic elementary school. The defendant further agreed that he acted as a manager and was subj ect t o the two-levelincrea se stated in Sec tion 3B1. 1(c). The government agre ed that Rios was entitled to a

two-leveldecrease for accept ance of respons ibil ity , under § 3E1. 1.
2 An ders v . Califo rnia , 386 U .S. 738 (196 7). 2 SC IRI CA , Chief Judge
. Carlos Baez appea ls hi s conviction and sentence after pleadi ng guilt

y t o conspir acy and dist ribution of more than 1,000 grams of PCP and 500 grams of c ocaine within 1,000 feet o f a sch ool. 1 His counsel file d an And ers brief 2 and a motion t o withdraw. Alt hough granted t hree ti me extensi ons to fi le a pro s e brief, Baez fai led to f ile hi s own brief. I. Carlos Baez participated i n the organi zed sale of cocaine and PCP on the 600 block of West Clearfiel d Street in Phil adelphi a. Supervi sors l ike Baez dis tri buted cocai ne and PC P to the s eller s, an d co llecte d th e pr oce eds fro m th em . In poli ce survei llanc e from January to March 2000, Baez was observed supervi sing sell ers and col lecting money f rom them, and r etri eving cocai ne from the storage locatio ns. B aez h imself mad e sev eral sale s to a co oper ating w itness, inc luding 13 sm all3

jars of PCP sold on February 25, 1999, 2. 565 grams of cocai ne sold on February 29, 1999, 6.113 gr ams of cocaine s old on March 15, 2000, and 6.69 grams of c ocaine sol d on M arch 16, 2 000
. On M arch 16, 2000, police arres ted Baez and seve ral co- conspir ators on the 600 block of West Clearfiel d Street . They also exec uted search warrants for res idences at 614 West Clearfi eld Str eet and 3108 North Sixth St reet, from which Baez had been observed
re trie vi ng d ru gs. The p ol ic e fo und si gni fi can t q uan ti ti es of P CP an d co cai ne. At the time of h is arrest, B aez p osses sed k eys to 61 4 W est C learfield Street. II. The government cal culat ed, based on various s eizure s and witnes s accounts , that the conspi racy sold at

least 38 grams of PCP and 35 grams of cocai ne each day during t he course of pol ice surveill ance, fr om January 12 through March 16, 2000. The presentence report , aft er adding t he quanti ties seized on March 16, 2000, det ermined that the totalquantit

ies for which Baez was responsi ble were 2, 592 grams of PCP and 2,472 gr ams of c oca in e. The repo rt not ed t hat th e go vernmen t f

ix ed ahi ghe r q uan ti tyof P CP base d on other s eizure s, but sta ted tha t the of fens e leve l wo uld b e unc hang ed ev en w ith the addi tionalPCP included. Factori ng in a three-le vel inc rease due to Baez’s manageri al rol e and a thr ee-le vel reducti on for accept ance of respons ibil ity , the pre-se ntence r eport r ecommended an offense level of 36. With a criminal hist ory category IV, based on several prior offenses,the repor

t fixe d a sentenc e range of 262-327 months. Other than the heighte ned leadership role enhancement, Baez did not object to anyof these calculati ons. III. At sentenci ng, the Distri ct Court a dopted the lower guidel ine range recommended by the plea agr eement, i n which the parties sti pulate d to a two-l evel rather t han three -level incr eas e fo r lead ersh ip ro le. T his lo we red the g uid eline ran ge to 235 -29 3 m ont hs. Defense counsel a dvocated a s entence at the bottom of that r ange. The court agreed and impo sed a senten ce of 235 mo nths im prison men t. As noted, defe nse counselfile d an And ers brief. We have independentl y r eviewed the r eco rd in clud ing the R ule 1 1 pl ea c ollo quy a nd t he le galit y of th e se nten ce im pos ed. We hold the plea

was validl y entered and the sentenc e was legal . We see no other possible errors. For these reasons, we will affi rm the judgment of conviction and sentence.
TO THE C LERK:

Please fi le the foregoing opi nion.

/s/ Anthony J. Sciri ca Chief Judge