FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT MAR 07, 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- 10968 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 0 0 0 2 6 - CR- T- 1 7 - TBM 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 C E S A R B O N I L L A , 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 M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( M ar c h 7, 2007) B efo re B IR C H , C A RN E S an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: C e s a rB o n illaap p e a ls h is 1 6 8 - m o n th s e n te n c e f o llo w in g h is g u ilty p le ato2

on e c ou ntof conspi ra cyt o p osse ss w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e f i ve ki l og ra m s or m ore o f co cai n e w h i l e o n b o ard a v essel su b j ectt o th e j u ri sd i ct i o n o f th e U n i t ed S t at es, i n v i ol at i on of 46 U . S . C . A . A pp . § 1 90 3(a) , (g), (j ) ( 20 06 ) ( re peal ed O ct . 6, 20 06 ), a nd 21 U . S . C . § 960( b) ( 1) ( B ) ( i i ) , a nd one c ountof the unde r l y i ng s ubs t a nt i ve o f f e n s e , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

4 6 U . S. C. A . A p p . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , ( g ) a n d 2 1 U . S. C. § 9 6 0 (b )(1 )(B )(i i ). H e rai ses a n u m b er o f i ssu es. I. B o n i l l a co n t en d s th ath i s sen t en ce v i o l at es th e S i x th A m en d m en tb ecau se the fa ctual prem i se of the se nt ence enhancem entthatw as appl i ed t o h i m un der U ni t ed S t at es S ent enci ng G ui del i nes § 2D 1. 1(b)(2)(B) (N ov . 20 05 ) w as nei ther foun d b y aj ury bey on d a re as on abl e dou btno r a dm i tt ed by hi m w hen h e pl ea ded gui l ty . B e c a us e B oni l l aw a s s e nt e nc e d unde rthe pos t - U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . 220, 125 S . C t . 738 ( 2005) , a dvi s ory gui de l i ne s r e gi m e , the r e w a s no co n st i tu t i o n al erro r i n th e u se o f j u d g e-fo u n d fact s. S ee U n i t ed S t at es v . D u d l ey, 46 3 F . 3d 12 21 , 12 28 (11th C i r. 20 06 ). II. B oni l l ac ont e nds tha tthe e vi de nc e w a s i ns uf f i c i e ntt o s uppor tthe § 2 D 1 .1 ( b ) ( 2 ) ( B ) e n h a n c e m e n t h e r e c e iv e d f o rb e in g th e s h ip ’s c ap ta in . T h is c ont e nt i on i s ba s e d on hi s a r gum e nttha tthe pr os e c ut orm e r e l y m a de apr of f e rof e v id e n c e , w h ic h w a s n e v e ra c tu a lly in tr o d u c e d . T h a t a r g u m e n t w a s n o t m a d e in3

th e d i stri ctco u rt , so w e rev i ew o n l y fo r p l ai n erro r. T h atm ean s B o n i l l a m u st s h o w th a t a n e rr o ro c c u rr e d , it w a s p la in , it a f f e c te ds u b s ta n tia l r ig h ts , a n d it

“ se ri ou sl y a ff

ec t s the fa i rnes s, i nt egri ty or pub l i c r eput at i on of j ud i ci al pr oc e e di ngs . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D unc a n, 400 F . 3d 1297, 1301 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ) , c e r t. d e n ie d , ___U .S . ___ , 1 2 6 S . C t. 4 3 2 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . N othi ng i n the se nt enci ng gu i del i nes, any app l i cabl e rul es , or ca se l aw proh i bi t s acourtfr om re sol vi ng a di sput ed se nt enci ng i ss ue base d o n p roff er ed e vi de nc e . I ti s true tha tupon c ha l l e nge ( of w hi c h the r e w a s none he r e ) the gove rnm e ntha s the bur de n t o s uppor tas e nt e nc i ng e nha nc e m e ntw i th “ r e l i abl e a nd spec i fi c e vi dence. ” U ni t ed S t at es v. B ernardi ne, 73 F . 3d 10 78 , 10 81 (11th C i r. 1996) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks om i tt e d) . I n B e rna r di ne , w e f ound tha tthe go vernm enthad n otm eti t s burden throu gh a proff erof evi dence: W hi l e c as e l aw fr om thi s c i rc ui tperm i t s adi stri ctcourtt o con si der re l i abl e hea rs ayevi dence atse nt enci ng , the ki nd of “ proffe r” w hi ch the c our ta c c e pt e d he r e w a s ne i the rr e l i abl e nore vi de nt i a ry . T he pr os e c ut or ’ s ba l d s t a t e m e nttha the c oul d pr oduc e thr e e w i tne s s e s w ho w ou l d t es t i fyt o sm ok i ng m ar i j uana w i th B ernardi ne ca nn otsupp ort the enhancem ent . T he prosecut or hi m se l f c ou l d n ott es t i fyt o the fa ct of B e rna r di ne ’ s a l l e ge d m a r i j ua naus e , af

a c taboutw hi c h he ha d no pe r s ona l know l e dge . M or e ove r , B e rna r di ne w a s unabl e t o c ha l l e nge the a l l e ga t i on: he c oul d ne i the re xa m i ne the “ w i tne s s - pr os e c ut or ” nor co n fr o n t th e p o ten ti al d ec lara n ts. A cc o rd in g ly, th e d istrict co u rt’s r e lia n c e o n th e “p r o f

f e r ” o f te s tim o n y w a s n o t “p r o p e r .” Id . at 1 0 8 2 . A t th e s en ten cin g h ea rin g in th is ca se , i n re sp o n se to B o n il la’s obj e c t i on t o the c apt a i n e nha nc e m e ntbe i ng appl i e d, the gove rnm e nti nf orm e d the4

c our ttha ttw o w i tne s s e s w e r e pr e s e nt , as pe c i a l a ge nta nd ac ode f e nda nt , w ho w o u l d t est i fy th atB o n i l l a w as th e cap t ai n an d o p erat ed th e G P S syst em . T h u s, u n lik e th e s itu a tio n in B e rn a r d in e , th e w itn e s s e s w e r e p r e s e n t a n d p r e p a r e d to t es t i fyi n thi s c as e, and B on i l l a c ou l d h ave e xam i ned and confront ed them i f he had w a n te d . T he gove rnm e nta l s o r e pr e s e nt e d t o the di s tr i c tc our ttha tthe s pe c i a l a ge nt w ou l d t es t i fythat , base d o n the debri ef i ng s, the other c od ef

endant s i dent i fi ed B o n illaa s th e s h ip ’s c ap ta in a n d th e p e r s o n w h o h a n d le d th e G P S s y s te m . B o n illa agre ed the tw o w i tness es w ou l d t es t i fythathe w as capt ai n, and h e c on fi rm ed that he ha d no c ontr a ry e vi de nc e t o of f e ron tha tpoi nt . B oni l l adi d nots ugge s tt o the d is tr ic t c o u r t th a t th e f

a c tu a l a s s e r tio n s in th e g o v e rn m e n t’s p r o f f e rw e r e u n r e liab le o rn o n s p e c if

ic . A c c o r d in g ly , th e r e w a s n o e rr o r , m u c h le s s p la in e rr o r . B on i l l a a l so cont ends thateven i f there w as suff i ci entbasi s t o fi nd he w as the c apt a i n of

the ve s s e l , the a c tua l i m por t a t i on of the c oc a i ne di d notc om e about and for thatre as on the § 2 D 1. 1(b)(2)(B) enhancem entshou l d n othave been appl i e d. T hi s i s a nothe ri s s ue B oni l l af a i l e d t o r a i s e i n the di s tr i c tc our t , s o our r e v ie w is lim ite d to lo o k in g f o rp la in e rr o r . U n d e rth e s e n te n c in g g u id e lin e s , a tw o - le v e l in c r e a s e is ap p lie d if , w h ile u n la w f

u lly im p o r tin g ac o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e ,

“ the de f e nda nta c t e d a s api l ot , c opi l ot , c apt a i n, na vi ga t or , f l i ghtof f i c e r , ora ny other operat i on al offi ce r abo ar d any vess el ca rryi ng a c on trol l ed subst ance . . . . ”5

U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) . T he he a di ng f orU . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1 r e a ds : “ U nl a w f ul M a n u f a c tu r in g , I m p o r tin g , E x p o r tin g , o rT r a f f ic k in g ( I n c lu d in g P o s s e s s io n w ith I n te n t to C o m m it T h e s e O f f e n s e s ) ; A tte m p t o rC o n s p ir a c y .” U .S .S .G . § 2 D 1 .1 (e m ph as i s a dd ed). W e do n otre qu i re the i m po rt at i on t o o cc ur before ase nt ence c a n be i nc r e a s e d by tw o- l e ve l s unde rU . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( b) ( 2) ( B ) . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R e n d o n , 3 5 4 F .3 d 1 3 2 0 , 1 3 3 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . F a c ts th a t e s tab lis h ac o n s p ir a c y to un l aw ful l y i m po rta c on trol l ed subst ance ar e s uffi ci entt o adj usta s ent ence u p w a r d s b y tw o - le v e ls if th e d e f e n d a n t a c te d a s ac ap ta in o f th e v e s s e l, a s B o n illa d id . S e e id . A g a in , th e r e w a s n o e rr o r , m u c h le s s p la in e rr o r . III. F i na l l y , B oni l l ac ont e nds tha thi s s e nt e nc e oughtt o be va c a t e d be c a us e the d is tr ic t c o u r t im p o s e d it w ith o u t c o n s id e r in g a ll th e 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s . A tse nt enci ng a di stri ctcourti s notre qu i re d t o d i sc uss or r ec ou ntea ch of the § 35 53 (a ) f ac t ors. U ni t ed S t at es v. S cott , 42 6 F . 3d 13 24 , 13 29 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). It i s e nough f

orthe c our tt o s t a t e tha ti tha s c ons i de r e d the de f e nda nt ’ s a r gum e nt s a nd th e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s . I d . a t 1 3 3 0 . T h e c o u r t d id th a t in th is c a s e . AF F I RME D.