FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT N ove m be r 21, 2005 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. 05- 13071 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 5 - 2 0 0 2 0 - C R - P AS 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 B L A N C A N U B I A G U Z M A 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

_________________________ ( N ove m be r21, 2005) B efo re C A RN E S , P R Y O R an d R O N E Y , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: T hi s i s adi r e c tc r i m i na l appe a l f r om c onvi c t i ons a nd s e nt e nc e s e nt e r e d upon agui l ty pl e aof

de f e nda ntB l a nc aN ubi aG uz m a n t o atw o- c ounti ndi c tm e ntof: ( 1) i m por t i ng one ki l ogr a m orm or e of he r oi n i nt o the U ni t e d S t a t e s , i n vi ol a t i on of2

21 U . S . C . § 952( a ) ; a nd ( 2) pos s e s s i ng w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e one ki l ogr a m or m or e of he r oi n, i n vi ol a t i on of

21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) . A ppoi nt e d c ouns e l f or defe nd ant , M i chae l S pi vack, has f i l ed a m ot i on t o w i thd ra w w i th a bri ef prepare d pur s ua ntt o A n de rs v . C a lifo r n ia , 38 6 U . S . 73 8, 87 S . C t . 13 96 (196 7), t o w hi ch de f e nda ntf i l e d aone - pa ge ha ndw r i tt e n obj e c t i on. C ouns e l ’ s m ot i on i s gr a nt e d a nd G uz m a n’ s c onvi c t i ons a nd s e nt e nc e s a r e a f f i rm e d. G u z m a n s ig n e d aS ta te m e n t o f F a c ts c o n c e d in g th a t, “if th is c a s e w e n t to tri al , ” the go vernm entcoul d est abl i sh beyond a r ea sonabl e dou bt : thatshe a rr i ved a tM i a mi I n t e rn a t i o n a l A i rp o r to n af l i g h tf r o m Co l o mb i a ; th a tar o u t i n e c u s t o ms i nspect i on of her baggage revea l ed se vera l “ un usual l y hea vy” pai rs of shoes cont ai ni ng heroi n; thatshe knew the “ subst ance cont ai ned i nsi de the shoes w as he r oi n” ; a nd l abor a t ory t e s t s s how e d tha tthe s hoe s c ont a i ne d at ot a l of 2, 617 g r a m s o f h e r o in . A f

te rc o n d u c tin g ath o r o u g h c h a n g e o f p le ac o llo q u y p u r s u a n t to F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 11 , the di stri ctcourtfoun d thatthe pl eaw as k n o w in g ly , v o lu n ta r ily , a n d in te llig e n tly e n te r e d , a n d th a t as u f f ic ie n t f a c tu a l b a s is supp ort ed the pl ea . G uzm an subsequent l y f i l ed w ri tt en obj ec t i on s t o the P re -s ent ence Invest i gat i on R eport(“ P S I” ). S he cont ended thatshe w as el i gi bl e f or ac ce pt ance of r e s pons i bi l i ty , m i norr ol e , a nd s a f e ty - va l ve r e duc t i ons . A tthe s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng, the c our tc onc l ude d tha tG uz m a n de s e rve d the be ne f i tof the a c c e pt a nc e of3

r e s p o n s ib ility a n d th e s a f e ty - v a lv e p r o v is io n , b u t d e c lin e d to g r a n t h e ram in o r - r o le r e d u c tio n , f

in d in g th a t G u z m a n ’s “o w n s ta te m e n t th a t s h e w a s b r in g in g [ th e h e r o in t o the U ni t e d S t a t e s ] a nd w a s goi ng t o s e l l i the r s e l f . . . a nd c ons i de r i ng the a m o u n t a n d th e n a tu r e o f th e d ru g , I c a n n o t s e e th a t am in o rr o le is ap p r o p r ia te here . ” T he courti m po se d a se nt ence of 70 m on ths’ i m pri sonm ent . N ei ther G uz m a n norhe ra tt orne y a s s e r t e d a ny obj e c t i ons t o the c our t ’ s f i ndi ngs of

f a c tor the m a nne ri n w hi c h the s e nt e nc e w a s i m pos e d. In h i s A n ders bri ef

, coun se l st at es thatthere ar e no n on -f ri vo l ou s c l ai m s that ca n b e pursued on appeal bu tra i se s the i ss ue of the di stri ctcourt ’ s deni al of a m i nor - r ol e r e duc t i on. D e f e nda ntG uz m a n’ s J ul y 25, 2005, ha ndw r i tt e n l e tt e rt o the C l erk, w hi ch w e c on strue l i bera l l y, ra i se s three po t ent i al i ss ues: (1) thather se nt ence of 70 m on ths’ i m pri sonm entw as t oo “ hars h”; (2) thatthe di stri ctcourt e rr e d by f

a i l i ng t o “ c ons i de r ” he rf a m i l y c i r c um s t a nc e s ; a nd ( 3) tha tbe c a us e s he

“ d i d n o tu n d erst an d h er l aw yer, ” an d w as “ n erv o u s w reck ” ab o u tp l ead i n g g u i l ty, h er g u i l ty p l ea w as n o tk n o w i n g an d v o l u n t ary. W e have care ful l y c on si dere d these ar gu m ent s a nd concl ud e thatthey p r e s e n t n o is s u e s o f

a r g u ab le m e r it f

o rap p e a l. T he di stri ctcourt , af

t eranal yz i ng the chara ct er i st i cs of G uzm an’ s off ense , c o rr e c tly c o n c lu d e d th a t s h e p la y e d a n in te g r a l r o le in th e im p o r ta tio n o f th e h e r o in4

f orw hi c h s he w a s he l d a c c ount abl e , a nd the r e f or e di d notc l e a r l y e rri n de ny i ng the m i nor - r ol e r e duc t i on. T he c our tde t e rm i ne d tha tthe appl i c abl e a dvi s ory s e nt e nc i ng gui de l i ne r a nge w as 7 0 t o 8 7 m o n th s’ i m p ri so n m en t , i m p o sed a sen t en ce o f 7 0 m o n th s’ i m pr i s onm e nta nd c onc l ude d tha ts uc h as e nt e nc e w a s r e a s onabl e , c ons i de r i ng the fa ct ors det ai l ed i n 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) . T he re cord ref l ec t s thatthe di stri ctcourt c a r e f ul l y c ons i de r e d a l l of

the r e l e va ntf

a c t or s i n i m pos i ng the s e nt e nc e a nd corr ec t l y c on cl ud ed, i n l i gh tof the m axi m um se nt ence avai l abl e, thatthe se nt ence im p o s e d w a s r e a s o n ab le . T he di stri ctcourtse nt ence d G uzm an af t erre vi ew i ng the P re -s ent ence I n v e s tig a tio n R e p o r t a n d c a r e f u lly c o n s id e r in g “th e f

a c to r s s e t f

o r th in 1 8 U .S .C ., 3553( a ) ( 1) thr ough ( 7) . ” T he P S I c ont a i ne d a“ P e r s ona l a nd F a m i l y D a t a ” s e c t i on tha tde s c r i be d i n de t a i l G uz m a n’ s f a m i l y c i r c um s t a nc e s . T he i nf orm a t i on c o n ta in e d in th e P S I is n e a r ly id e n tic a l to th e f a m ily c ir c u m s ta n c e s r a is e d in G uzm an’ s obj ec t i on fi l ed i n thi s C ou rt . Iti s e vi dentthatthe di stri ctcourtw ei gh ed these ci rc um st ance s w hi l e dec i di ng G uzm an’ s s ent ence . A tho roug h F eder al R ul e of C ri m i nal P roce du re 11 col l oq uy w as cond uct ed by the di s tr i c tc ourt , w he r e i tc orr e c t l y a s c e r t a i ne d tha ts he know i ngl y a nd vo l un t ar i l y e nt er ed a gui l ty pl ea . A n i nd ependentre vi ew of the ent i re re cord re veal s no i ss ues of a rguabl e m er i t . S ee A n ders , 386 U . S . a t744, 87 S . C t . a t1400.5

C o u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N TED , a nd G uz m a n’ s c onvi c t i ons and sent ence s a re AF F I RME D.