FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT O c t obe r 12, 2007 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T 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. 06- 14135 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 2 0 0 3 8 - 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 J E S U S R O D R I G O R I N C O N , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om 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

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 12, 2007) B efo re D U B IN A , B L A C K an d C A RN E S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

J e s u s R o d r ig o R in c o n ap p e a ls h is s e n te n c e im p o s e d a f te rh e p le d g u ilty to c o n s p i r i n g t o i mp o r tf

i v e k i l o g r a ms o rmo r e o f c o c a i n e , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 2 1 U . S. C. § 9 63 . W e a ff

i rm R i ncon ’ s s ent ence . R i nc on a s s e r t s the di s tr i c tc our te rr e d i n de ny i ng hi m a m i nor - r ol e r e duc t i on p u r s u a n t to U .S .S .G . § 3 B 1 .2 ( b ) . R in c o n c o n te n d s th e c o u r t f a ile d to c o m p a r e h is co n d u ctt o th e co n d u cto f h i s co -co n sp i rat o rs. R i n co n assert s h e w as cl earl y l ess c ul pabl e tha n the othe rpa r t i c i pa nt s be c a us e he ha d no i nde pe nde ntknow l e dge of the conspi ra cydet ai l s a nd hi s onl y f un ct i on w as t o i ntrodu ce the confi dent i al s o u r c e ( C S ) to a c o - c o n s p ir a to r , P o m p ilio G u tie rr e z , f o ra s m a ll f

e e . " T hi s C ourtha s l ong a nd r e pe a t e dl y he l d tha ta di s tr i c tc our t ' s de t e r m i na t i on of a def endant ' s r ol e i n the offens e i s afi nd i ng of fa ctt o b e r evi ew ed on l y f or cl ea r erro r. " U

ni te d State s v . D e V

ar on , 1 7 5 F .3 d 9 3 0 , 9 3 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 9 ) ( e n b a n c ) . T he de f e nda nt , a s the pr opone ntof the dow nw a r d a dj us tm e nt , be a r s the bur de n of p r o v in g th e m itig a tin g r o le in th e o f f e n s e b y a p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f th e e v id e n c e . I

d. a t 9 3 9 . T h e S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es p erm i ta co u rtt o d ecrease a d efen d an t ' s o ffen se l e ve l by tw o poi nt s i f

i tf i nds the de f

e nda ntw a s a " m i norpa r t i c i pa nt " i n the c r im in a l a c tiv ity . U .S .S .G § 3 B 1 .2 ( b ) . A m in o rp a r tic ip a n t is a d e f e n d a n t “w h o is l es s c ul pabl e than m ostother part i ci pant s, bu tw ho se rol e c ou l d n otbe desc ri bed as3

m in im a l." U .S .S .G . § 3 B 1 .2 , c o m m e n t. ( n .5 ) . I n d e te r m in in g w h e th e ra m in o r - r o le re du ct i on i s w arra nt ed, a di stri ctcourt"s ho ul d b e i nform ed by tw o p ri nci pl es di sc erned from the G ui del i nes. ” D e V ar on , 175 F . 3d a t940. U nde rthe f i r s tpr ong, w hi c h m a y be di s pos i t i ve i n m a ny c a s e s , “ the di s tr i c tc our tm us tm e a s ur e the d e f e n d a n t's r o le a g a in s t th e r e le v a n t c o n d u c t f o rw h ic h [ h e ] w a s h e ld a c c o u n tab le atse nt enci ng . ” I

d. a t945. R e l e va ntc onduc ti s the “ c onduc ta ttr i but e d t o the d efen d an ti n cal cu l at i n g [h i s] b ase o ffen se l ev el . " I d. a t941. U nde rthe s e c ond pron g, “ the di stri ctcourtm ayal so m ea sure the defendant ' s r ol e a gai nstthe other part i ci pant s, t o the ext entthatthey a re di sc ernabl e, i n thatre l evantcond uct . ” I d. at 9 4 5 . A d e f

e n d a n t, h o w e v e r , “is n o t a u to m a tic a lly e n title d to a m in o rr o le adj ustm entm er el y bec ause [he] w as som ew hatl es s c ul pabl e than the other di s c e rnabl e pa r t i c i pa nt s . R a the r , the di s tr i c tc our tm us tde t e r m i ne tha tthe de f e nda ntw a s l e s s c ul pabl e tha n m o s t o th e rp a r tic ip a n ts i n [th e] rel ev an tco n d u ct . " I d. a t944. R in c o n d id n o t s a tis f

y th e f ir s t p r o n g b e c a u s e h is a c tu a l c o n d u c t, a subst ant i al rol e i n a conspi ra cyt o i m po rtt en ki l og ra m s of c ocai ne i nt o the U ni t ed S t at es, w as i d en t i cal t o th e rel ev an tco n d u ctfo r w h i ch h e w as sen t en ced . B ecau se R in c o n w a s o n ly h e ld a c c o u n tab le f o rth e d ru g s th a t w e r e im p o r te d d u e to h is pe r s ona l c onduc t , “ [ the ] di s tr i c tc our t[ c oul d] l e gi t i m a t e l y c onc l ude tha t[ R i nc on]4

pl ay ed an i m po rt antor es se nt i al rol e i n the i m po rt at i on of tho se drug s. ” I d. a t942- 43. A s t o the s e c ond pr ong, R i nc on’ s a r gum e ntthe di s tr i c tc our te rr e d by f a i l i ng t o c om pa r e hi s c onduc tt o the othe rpa r t i c i pa nt s ’ c onduc ti s nots uppor t e d by the r e c o r d . A lth o u g h a t th e s e n te n c in g h e a r in g th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t m a k e s p e c if ic fi nd i ng s c om pari ng R i ncon ’ s c on du ctt o thatof G ut i erre z, the courtdi d st at e i thad

“ di s c us s e d the m a tt e rw i th the pr oba t i on of f i c e r , a nd [ a gr e e d] w i th the pr oba t i on offi ce r’ s c on cl usi on . ” I n h i s c on cl usi on , the prob at i on offi ce r i ncl ud ed bo th an a s s e s s m e ntof

R i nc on’ s c onduc ta nd a c om pa r i s on be tw e e n R i nc on’ s a nd G ut i erre z’ s r ol es . T he prob at i on offi ce r det erm i ned thatR i ncon and G ut i erre z had s im ila rr o le s b e c a u s e th e y “w e r e b o th c o n ta c ts th e C S s p o k e w ith o n a r e g u la rb a s is r e ga r di ng the c oc a i ne s hi pm e nt[ a nd t ] he y both ha d know l e dge of de t a i l s r e ga r di ng th e m a n n e rin w h ic h th e c o c a in e w o u ld b e s m u g g le d , a s w e ll a s w h e n a n d w h e r e .” In contra stt o R i ncon ’ s a rgum ent , he had a l ar ger r ol e i n the conspi ra cythan j ustre crui t i ng the C S . H e a l so re m ai ned i n con t ac tw i th b oth the C S and G ut i erre z r e ga r di ng the c oc a i ne s hi pm e nt , pa r t i c i pa t e d i n c onve r s a t i ons pl a nni ng the s m uggl i ng of

the drugs , r e l a y e d i nf

or m a t i on t o the C S t o f

ur the rthe s m uggl i ng o p e r a tio n , a n d a rr a n g e d to r e c e iv e $ 2 ,5 0 0 in e x c h a n g e f o rin tr o d u c in g th e C S to G u t i errez. A l th o u g h each p art i ci p an th ad d i fferen tro l es i n th e co n sp i racy, th ese5

di ff er ence s do n oti nd i ca t e thatei ther c o-conspi ra t or w as m ore c ul pabl e than R i n co n . W e h av e reco g n i zed th ati ti s en t i rel y p o ssi b l e fo r co n sp i raci es t o ex i st w h e r e n o c o - c o n s p ir a to r ’s c o n d u c t w a rr a n ts a n a d ju s tm e n t f

o rr o le in th e o f

f e n s e . D e V ar on , 175 F . 3d a t944. W e c on cl ud e the di stri ctcourtdi d n otcl ea rl y e rri n d enyi ng R i ncon a m i no rr o le r e d u c tio n . AF F I RME D.