FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT NOVEMB ER 26, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ 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- 14956 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 9 0 - 0 6 0 3 6 - C R - J AG 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 G A B R I E L A L V A R O S C A F F - M A R T I N E Z , 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 b e r 26, 2007) B efo re T JO F L A T , B L A C K an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: G ab ri el A l v aro S caff-M art i n ez ap p eal s pro se the di stri ctcourt ’ s order2

denyi ng hi s m ot i on t o reduce hi s s ent ence pu rs uantt o 1 8 U . S . C . § 3 58 2(c) (2). In 1 9 9 1 , S c a f

f - M a r tin e z w a s s e n te n c e d to p r is o n f o r2 9 5 m o n th s , s te m m in g f r o m h is c onvi c t i on f

ori nt e nta nd c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s a nd di s tr i but e 182 ki l ogr a m s of coca i ne. O n thi s app ea l , S ca ff -M art i nez pri m ar i l y a rgues thatU ni t ed S t at es S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s A m e ndm e nt484 appl i e s t o hi s s e nt e nc e be c a us e the c r a t e of coca i ne used i n the st i ng thatre sul t ed i n h i s a rr es tcont ai ned m ost l y s ham coca i ne, m a t e r i a l tha tw oul d ha ve ne e de d t o be s e pa r a t e d be f or e the r e a l c oc a i ne c oul d be used. H e a l so ar gu es thatthi s c as e s ho ul d b e r em anded t o a di ff er entj ud ge. W e r e vi e w a di s tr i c tc our t ’ s de c i s i on w he the rt o r e duc e a s e nt e nc e pur s ua nt to 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 8 2 ( c ) ( 2 ) f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . U

ni t e d Stat e s v . Mor e no , 421 F . 3d 1217, 1219 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( pe rc ur i a m ) ( c i t i ng U ni t e d Stat e s v . B r ow n, 332 F . 3d 13 41 , 13 43 (11t h C i r. 20 03 )) . A d is tr ic t c o u r t g e n e r a lly “m a y n o t m o d if y a te r m o f

im p r is o n m e n t o n c e it has bee n i m po se d. ” 18 U . S . C . § 3 58 2(c) . T here ar e e xcept i on s t o thi s rul e, how e ve r , i nc l udi ng the f ol l ow i ng: [ w he n a de f

e nda nt ] ha s be e n s e nt e nc e d t o a t e r m of i m pr i s onm e nt ba s e d on a s e nt e nc i ng r a nge tha tha s s ubs e que nt l y be e n l ow e r e d by the S e nt e nc i ng C om m i s s i on pur s ua ntt o 28 U . S . C . 994( o) , upon m ot i on of

the de f e nda nt. . . the c our tm a y r e duc e the t e r m of im p r is o n m e n t, a f

te rc 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 . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ] to th e e x te n t th a t th e y a r e ap p lic ab le , if s u c h a r e d u c tio n is c ons i s t e ntw i th appl i c abl e pol i c y s t a t e m e nt s i s s ue d by the S e nt e nc i ng C om m i s s i on.3

1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 8 2 ( c ) ( 2 ) . T h e s e n te n c in g g u id e lin e s lis t th e a m e n d m e n ts th a t ap p ly r e tr o a c tiv e ly a n d c a n th e r e f o r e s e r v e a s th e b a s is o f a § 3 5 8 2 ( c ) ( 2 ) m o tio n . U .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .1 0 ( a ) , ( c ) ; s e e U ni t e d Stat e s v . A r m s tr ong , 3 4 7 F .3 d 9 0 5 , 9 0 7 ( 1 1 th C i r. 20 03 ) ( no t i ng that“ for ase nt ence t o b e r educed retroac t i vel y und er § 3582( c ) ( 2) , a c our tm us tde t e r m i ne w he the rthe r e ha s be e n a n a m e ndm e ntt o the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes thathas l ow er ed the gu i del i ne ra ng e app l i cabl e t o that sen t en ce an d i s l i st ed u n d er § 1 B 1 . 1 0 (c)”). A m en d m en t4 8 4 i s i n cl u d ed o n th e l i st of re troac t i ve am endm ent s. U . S . S . G . § 1 B 1. 10 (c ). A m e ndm e nt484 a m e nde d the c om m e nt a ry t o U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1 t o i nc l ude th e f o llo w in g ap p lic a tio n n o te , in r e le v a n t p a r t: M i xtur e ors ubs t a nc e doe s noti nc l ude m a t e r i a l s tha tm us tbe se para t ed fr om the cont rol l ed subst ance before the cont rol l ed s ubs t a nc e c a n be us e d. E xa m pl e s of s uc h m a t e r i a l s i nc l ude the f i be r gl a s s i n a c oc a i ne / f

i be r gl a s s bonde d s ui t c a s e , be e s w a x i n a coca i ne/bees w ax st atue, and w as t e w at erfr om an i l l i ci tl aborat ory used t o m anufacture acont rol l ed subst ance . U .S .S .G . § 2 D 1 .1 , c m t. n .1 . S c a f f - M a r tin e z a r g u e s th a t th is ap p lic a tio n n o te s houl d appl y r e tr oa c t i ve l y t o hi s s e nt e nc e be c a us e outof the 182 ki l ogr a m s of

“ c oc a i ne ” us e d i n the s t i ng tha tr e s ul t e d i n hi s a rr e s t , onl y 9 ki l ogr a m s c ons i s t e d of r e a l c oc a i ne ; the r e m a i ni ng 173 ki l ogr a m s c ons i s t e d of s ha m c oc a i ne , w hi c h he ar gu es i s a“ m at er i al [] thatm ustbe se para t ed fr om the cont rol l ed subst ance before“In an off ense involvingan agreement to sell a controlled substanc e, the agree d-upon 1 qu antity of thec ontroll e d s ub sta

nc esh all b eus e d tode terminetheof fens ele ve l unle ss t

hesaleis completed a

nd the amount delivered moreaccurate ly ref lects the scale of the of

fense. . . in a reverse sting , the agreed-upon quantity of the c ontrolled substancewould more accurately ref lect thesc aleof

theof fens ebe c a

us etheamou

nt ac tually

de liv e re d isc ontroll e d b y theg ov e rnment, not by the def endant.”U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, cmt. n.12 (emphasis adde d). 4 the cont rol l ed subst ance ca n b e use d. ” I n thi s c a s e , e vi de nc e a ttr i a l s how e d tha tappr oxi m a t e l y 182 ki l ogr a m s of coca i ne w as se i ze d d uri ng the i nv es t i gat i on of the conspi ra cy thati ncl ud ed S ca ff -M art i nez. T hen, the evi dence s ho w s, S ca ff -M art i nez a gree d t o p urchas e that sa m e a m ou ntof cocai ne fr om the i nform ant . T here fore , S ca ff -M art i nez w as p r o p e r ly s e n te n c e d b a s e d o n a ll 1 8 2 k ilo g r a m s o f c o c a in e . See U

ni t ed Stat es v. T a ffe , 36 F . 3d 1047, 1050 ( 11th C i r . 1994) ( c onc l udi ng tha ta l l of the c oc a i ne the de f e nda nt s i nt e nde d t o s t e a l w a s pr ope r l y i nc l ude d i n the s e nt e nc i ng c a l c ul a t i on on c ons pi r a c y c onvi c t i ons , e ve n though the y onl y a c tua l l y s t ol e a por t i on of the coca i ne before autho ri t i es i nt ervened); U . S . S . G . § 2 D 1. 1, cm t . n. 12 . M oreover, 1 w e p r e v io u s ly a f

f ir m e d S c a f

f - M a r tin e z ’s c o n v ic tio n s a n d s e n te n c e s b a s e d o n th is d ru g a m o u n t. A c c o r d in g ly , th e o n ly p o s s ib le in q u iry r e g a r d in g A m e n d m e n t 4 8 4 in th is c a s e i s w he the rthe 182 ki l ogr a m s of c oc a i ne s e i z e d dur i ng the i nve s t i ga t i on, a nd in te n d e d to b e p u r c h a s e d b y S c a f f - M a r tin e z , in c lu d e d a n o th e rs u b s ta n c e th a t h a d to be se para t ed before the cocai ne coul d b e use d. A ttri al , the t es t i m on y s ug gest edScaff -Mar tinez’s relianceon United States v. J ackson , 1 15 F .3 d 8 43 (1 1th Cir . 1 99 7) , is 2 misplaced. In that case , the def endant wa s found in a c tua l posse ssion of a substancecontaining a pp ro ximate ly

10 00 gra ms o f s ug ar a

nd 10 gra ms, or 1% , o f c oc aine , a

nd wa s erron e ou sly sentenc ed base d on the entireweight of a packag e. Jack son , 115 F.3d at 844–45. ScaffMartinez, on the other ha nd, was sentenced f

or conspiring and intending to possess and distribute 182 kilogra

ms of what he be lieved to be real c ocaine .

5 th a t th e b a g s c o n ta in e d o n ly c o c a in e . S c a f f - M a r tin e z d o e s n o t a lle g e o th e rw is e ; r a th e r , h is a r g u m e n ts f

o c u s o n th e s e a le d c r a te u s e d d u r in g th e s tin g th a t ap p a r e n tly c o n ta in e d o n ly 9 k ilo g r a m s o f c o c a in e a n d 1 7 3 k ilo g r a m s o f f lo u ro rs h a m c o c a in e . T he cont ent s of the cr at e a tthatst age w er e i rr el evant , ho w ever , as he w as char ged w i th i n t en tan d co n sp i racy resu l t i n g fro m h i s a g reem en t to p u rch a se 1 8 2 k i l o g r a ms of r e a l c oc a i ne ; he w a s notc ha r ge d w i th a c tua l l y pos s e s s i ng the c oc a i ne us e d i n the s t i ng. 2 F i ndi ng tha tA m e ndm e nt484 ha s no e f f e c ton S c a f

f - M a r t i ne z ’ s s e nt e nc e , the di s tr i c tc our tthe n c ons i de r e d the f a c t or s s e tf

or th i n 18 U . S . C . § 3553( a ) a nd p r o p e r ly f

o u n d n o b a s is w ith w h ic h to r e d u c e h is s e n te n c e . B ec ause w e hol d thatthe di stri ctcourtcom m i tt ed no error, l etal on e a n ab u sed i t s d i scret i o n , th ere i s n o n eed fo r u s t o ad d ress S caff-M art i n ez’ s req u est thatw e r em and t hi s c as e t o a di ff er entdi stri ctj ud ge. A F F I R M E D .