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 29, 2006 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- 14913

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 3 - 2 0 9 8 0 - CR- PCH 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 L E O N A R D O R O S Q U E T E , a .k .a . L e o n a r d o F ir m o R o s q u e te - T ru s illo , 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 r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 29, 2006) B efo re E D M O N D S O N , C h i ef Ju d g e, B A R K E T T an d C O X , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: L eo n ard o R o sq u et e ap p eal s h i s fed eral sen t en ce fo r co n sp i racy t o p o ssess2

w i th i n t en tt o d i stri b u t e 1 0 0 k i l o g ram s o r m o re o f m ari j u an a. S p eci fi cal l y, R osqu et e a rgues thathi s s ent ence shou l d n othave been enhanced u nd erthe ca re er offe nd erprov i si on s of U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 1 o n the basi s of hi s pri or conv i ct i on un der the T ra vel A ct , 18 U . S . C . § 1 95 2(a) . B ec au se w e c o n clu d e th at th e d istrict co u rt p ro p er ly re li ed u p o n R o sq u ete’s T r a v e l Ac tc o n v i c t i o n u n d e rS h e p a r d v . Un i t e d S t a t e s , 5 4 4 U. S . 1 3 ( 2 0 0 5 ) , we af fi rm R osqu et e’ s s ent ence . B AC KG R OU ND T hi s app ea l ar i se s outof an i nd i ctm entagai nstR osqu et e ( al on g w i th sever al c o - d e f e n d a n t s ) f

o r( 1 ) c o n s p i r a c y t o p o s s e s s w i th i n t e n tt o d i s tr i b u t e 1 0 0 k i l o g r a ms o rm o r e o f

m a r iju a n a , in v io la tio n o f 2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 6 ; a n d ( 2 ) p o s s e s s io n w ith i n t e n tt o d i s tr i b u t e 1 0 0 k i l o g r a ms o rmo r e o f ma r i j u a n a , i n v i o l a t i o n o f

2 1 U . S. C. § 841( a ) ( 1) a nd ( b) ( 1) ( B ) . A ts e nt e nc i ng, the di s tr i c tc our tdi s m i s s e d C ount2 on th e g o v e r n m e n t’s m o tio n . R o s q u e te p le d g u ilty to th e r e m a in in g c o u n t w ith o u t a w r itte n p le a a g r e e m e n t. In i t s P re se nt ence Invest i gat i on R eport(P S I) , the U . S . P robat i on O ff i ce se t R o s q u e te ’s b a s e o f

f e n s e le v e l a t 2 8 , b a s e d o n th e a m o u n t o f m a r iju a n a a lle g e d in th e in d ic tm e n t. I t th e n r e c o m m e n d e d a n in e - le v e l e n h a n c e m e n t p u r s u a n t toSe c tio n 4 B 1. 1( a) a uth orize s suc h a

n enh anc e ment i f “ (1 ) t

hede fendant w a s at le a st 1 eighteen year s old at the time the defendant committed the instant offense of c onviction; (2) the instant offenseof convic tion is a felony that is either a crime of violenc e or a controlled substance of

fense ; and (3) thedefendant has at least two prior fe lony convictions of either

a crime of violence or

a controlled substance of fense .” Un der t heTrave l A c t, 2 Who e ver t

ra ve ls in inters tateor

fo re ign c omm e rc eor

us e s th email o r a

ny fac ili ty in interstate or f

oreign commerc e, with intent to— (1) distribute the proce eds of a ny unlawful activity ; or (2) commit any

crime of violence to f

urther a ny unlawful activity ; or (3) otherwise promote, manag e, esta blish, carr y on, or facilitate the promotion, manag ement, esta blishment, or car

rying on, of

any un l aw f u la c t i v i ty, and there a ft e r p e rf

or ms o r attempt s toperf

or m— (A) an ac t de sc ribe d in pa ragra ph(1 ) o r ( 3) sh all b efine d und e r t his title, imprisoned not more than 5 year s, or both; or (B ) an ac t describe d in paragraph ( 2) shall be f ined under

this ti tle, imp ri so ne d f

or no t mo retha

n 2 0 ye ars , o r b oth , a

nd if de ath re sults shall be imprisoned for

any term of year s or for life . 18 U.S.C § 1952(a). Nota bly , the Tra

vel Act spe cifically

define s “unlawf

ul activity” to include “any business enterprise involving ... c ontrolled substance s.” I d. at § 1952(b)( 1). 3 U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 1( a ) , r e l y i ng upon tw o pr i ordrug c onvi c t i ons : a 1993 c onvi c t i on 1 i n the M i dd l e D i stri ctof F l ori da and a 19 95 conv i ct i on i n the D i stri ctof M ai ne. T he P S I a l so no t ed, bu tdi d n otre l y upo n, a 199 6 con vi ct i on i n the N orthern D i stri ctof T exas for vi ol at i ng the T ra vel A ct , 18 U . S . C . § 1 95 2(a) . A ft er 2 re du ct i on s f

or ac ce pt ance of re spon si bi l i ty, R osqu et e’ s a dj ust ed base offe nse l evel w a s 34. W i th a c r i m i na l hi s t or y c a t e gor y s c or e of V I , the r e s ul t i ng pr e s um pt i ve g u id e lin e s r a n g e w a s 2 6 2 - 3 2 7 m o n th s ’ im p r is o n m e n t.4

R os que t e obj e c t e d t o the P S I i n the di s tr i c tc our ton tw o gr ounds : F i r s t , he a r gue d tha tthe c a r e e rof f e nde re nha nc e m e ntvi ol a t e d B l a ke l y v. W a s hi ngt on, 542 U .S . 2 9 6 ( 2 0 0 4 ) . S e c o n d , h e m a in ta in e d th a t th e N o r th e r n D is tr ic t o f T e x a s , in se nt enci ng hi m for hi s 199 6 T ra vel A ctconv i ct i on s, had rel i ed up on a P S I that as se rt ed thatthe tw o d rug con vi ct i on s r el i ed up on i n the curre ntca se w er e

“ r e l a t e d. ” T ha tf

i ndi ng, R os que t e s ugge s t e d, c ol l a t e r a l l y e s t oppe d the gove r nm e nt fr om ar gu i ng thatthe tw o con vi ct i on s c ou l d b e c on si dere d separ at el y i n thi s c as e, a n d f r o m th e r e f

o r e s a t i s f y i n g th e “ two p r i o rf

e l o n y c o n v i c t i o n s ” p r o n g o f U. S . S . G. § 4 B 1. 1(a) . A ft ergrant i ng the go vernm ent ’ s m ot i on for ado w nw ar d d epar ture bas ed u p o n R o sq u ete’s s u b stan ti al as sistan ce , th e d istrict co u rt re jected R o sq u ete’s a r gum e nt s , hol di ng tha t( 1) B l a ke l y doe s notappl y t o the f e de r a l gui de l i ne s ; a nd ( 2) the c our tw a s notbound by the N or the r n D i s tr i c tof T e xa s ’ s c onc l us i on tha tthe predi ca t e c on vi ct i on s w er e “ re l at ed. ” O n app ea l , w e hel d thatthe di stri ctcourtcom m i tt ed st atut ory e rr or un der U ni t ed S t at es v. B oo ker, 54 3 U . S . 22 0 (20 05 ), by se nt enci ng R osqu et e und era m andat ory gui del i nes s ys t em . W e a l so hel d thatR osqu et e had i ntrodu ce d i ns uf f i c i e ntpr oof

t o e s t a bl i s h tha tthe N or the r n D i s tr i c tof T e xa s ha d r e l i e d upon the P S I ’ s c ha r a c t e r i z a t i on of the tw o pr i ordrug f

e l oni e s a s “ r e l a t e d” i n s e nt e nc i ng5

hi m f orthe T r a ve l A c tc onvi c t i on. H ow e ve r , i n r e m a ndi ng f orr e s e nt e nc i ng i n l i ght of B ooke r , w e l e f

tope n the pos s i bi l i ty tha tR os que t e c oul d i ntr oduc e f ur the rpr oof c onc e r ni ng hi s c ol l a t e r a l e s t oppe l a r gum e nt . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R os que t e , N o. 04 -158 62 , 20 05 W L 15 19 35 4 (11 th C i r. June 28 , 20 05 ) ( un pu bl i shed). O n r e m a nd, the gove r nm e nta r gue d tha tc ol l a t e r a l e s t oppe l w a s a m a tt e rof l aw , and t here fore the di stri ctcourtw as barr ed fr om consi deri ng de no vo w hether the tw o u nd er l yi ng drug fe l on i es w er e r el at ed. T he go vernm ental so cont ended that , even i f c ol l at er al es t op pel di d b arconsi dera t i on of the tw o d rug fel on i es as sep arat e o ffen ses, th e T rav el A ctco n v i ct i o n w as, i t sel f, a d ru g -rel at ed o ffen se un der U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 1(a) , there by j ust i fy i ng the appl i ca t i on of the ca re eroffe nd er e n h a n c e m e n t. In l i gh tof further e vi dence provi ded b y R osqu et e, the di stri ctcourt concl ud ed thati tw as bo un d b y the N orthern D i stri ctof T exas ’ s f i nd i ng that R osqu et e’ s 199 3 and 19 95 drug conv i ct i on s w er e r el at ed. H ow ever , the di stri ct courtac ce pt ed the go vernm ent ’ s a l t ernat i ve ar gu m entthatthe 19 96 T ra vel A ct conv i ct i on w as , i t se l f, a drug-rel at ed offe nse, there by prov i di ng the neces sa ry s uppor tf ora n e nha nc e m e ntpur s ua ntt o U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 1( a ) . T a ki ng i nt o a c c ount the m i t i ga t i ng f

a c t or s a r gue d by R os que t e , the di s tr i c tc our ts e nt e nc e d hi m t o 180 m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t, f o llo w e d b y e ig h t y e a r s s u p e r v is e d r e le a s e . R o s q u e te tim e lyOn September 25, 2006, two days before the c ase w as to be a rgued bef ore this Court, the 3 g overnment submitted a Motion to Supplement the Record on A ppeal, includingwith it a copy of thesu pers e dinginf

or matio n f ile d in theTrave l A c t c a se . That in fo rm atio n, to which Ro sq ue te ple d guilty, spe c if

ie d th at th e“un lawf

ul ac tiv ity”heint e nd e d tofac ili tatewa s “ a bu sin e ss enter prise eng ag ed in the fe lonious buying a nd selling of

controlled substanc es.” We do not c on side r t hissu bmi ssi on in t here so lution

of Ros qu e te ’s a

pp e al. 6 f ile d th is ap p e a l. 3 DI S C US S I ON T he ce ntra l i ss ue before us i s w hether the di stri ctcourtw as corr ec tthat R o s q u e te ’s 1 9 9 6 c o n v ic tio n f o rv io la tin g th e T r a v e l A c t c o n s titu te s a f e lo n y th a t is a “ c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e of f e ns e ” f orpurpos e s of

U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 1( a ) . A l though T ra vel A ctconv i ct i on s s uch as R osqu et e’ s a re un deni abl y f el on i es (s i nce they c a r r y a m a x im u m s e n te n c e e x c e e d in g o n e y e a r ) , th e y d o n o t c a te g o r ic a lly const i tut e a“ cont rol l ed subst ance offe nse, ” w hi ch the gu i del i nes def i ne as “ an o f f e n s e u n d e rf

e d e r a l o rs ta te la w . . . th a t p r o h ib its th e m a n u f a c tu r e , im p o r t, e x p o r t, d is tr ib u tio n , o rd is p e n s in g o f a c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e ( o ra c o u n te r f e it subst ance ) or the po ss es si on of a c on trol l ed subst ance (or acoun t er fe i tsubst ance ) wi th i n t e n tt o m a n u f

a c tu r e , i m p o r t , e x p o r t , d i s tr i b u t e , o rd i s p e n s e . ” U. S . S . G. § 4 B 1. 2(b). T hati s t o say , i ti s possi bl e t o b e c on vi ct ed un der the T ra vel A ctfor a n o f f e n s e th a t is n o t a “c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e o f f e n s e .” T o ascert ai n w h eth er R o sq u et e’ s T rav el A ctco n v i ct i o n co n st i tu t es a “c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e o f f e n s e ,” th e n , w e lo o k b e y o n d th e la n g u a g e o f th e s ta tu te to7

the f a c t s of the unde r l y i ng c onvi c t i on, butonl y t o the e xt e ntpe r m i tt e d by the S up re m e C ou rti n S hepard v. U ni t ed S t at es , 54 4 U . S . 13 , and T ay l or v. U ni t ed S t a t e s , 495 U . S . 575 ( 1990) . T ha ti s , w e m a y l ook onl y t o “ the t e r m s of the c ha r gi ng doc um e nt , the t e r m s of a pl e a a gr e e m e ntortr a ns c r i ptof c ol l oquy betw ee n j ud ge and d ef

endanti n w hi ch the fa ctual basi s f or the pl eaw as confi rm ed b y th e d e f

e n d a n t, o rto s o m e c o m p a r a b le ju d ic ia l r e c o r d o f th is in f o r m a tio n .” S h e p a r d , 5 4 4 U .S . a t 2 6 ; s e e U n ite d S ta te s v . D o w d , 4 5 1 F .3 d 1 2 4 4 , 1 2 5 4 ( 1 1 th C i r. 20 06 ). R os que t e ’ s pl e a a gr e e m e nti n the T r a ve l A c tc a s e i nc l ude d the f ol l ow i ng s t i pul a t i on: “ T he D e f

e nda nta gr e e s a nd s t i pul a t e s tha tthe f a c t s s e tf or th i n the F ac tual R es um e a re a true a nd corr ec tst at em entof hi s off ense cond uctand t hat such fa ct s m ay be t aken i nt o con si dera t i on by the C ou rti n d et erm i ni ng w hat sen t en ce t o i m p o se. ” B ecau se th e p l ea ag reem en tso p ro v i d es, an d b ecau se Ro s q u e t e d o e s n o ta r g u e t o th e c o n tr a r y , w e th e r e f o r e l o o k t o th e Fa c tu a l Re s u me f r o m h is T r a v e l A c t c o n v ic tio n to a s c e r ta in w h e th e rth a t c o n v ic tio n d o e s , in f a c t, c o n s titu te a “c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e o f f e n s e .” O ne pass age f

rom the F ac tual R es um e i s part i cul ar l y i nstruct i ve: I n th e l a tt e rp a r to f

F e b ru a r y 1 9 9 1 , L E O N A R D O F I R MO R O S Q U E T E , tr a ve l e d w i th A l be r t o Q ui none s f r om the s t a t e of G eorgi a t o F ortW orth, T exas . Q ui no nes w as com i ng t o T exas as part of hi s ongoi ng bus i ne s s r e l a t i ons hi p w i th V i c t orM a t i a s C os t a i n the8

tr a f f i c ki ng of c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e s . R O S Q U E T E kne w tha tthe purpos e of

the tr i p w a s t o f

a c i l i t a t e tha tr e l a t i ons hi p. R O S Q U E T E a nd Q ui none s a r r i ve d i n the F or tW or th a r e a a nd c he c ke d i nt o the H am pt on Inn l ocat ed on Int er st at e H i gh w ay 20 i n A rl i ng t on , T exas w hi ch w as no tfa r f

rom the apartm enti n A rl i ng t on . R O S Q U E T E used the na m e of

“ A nge l R i ve r a ” w he n he r e gi s t e r e d a tthe hot e l on F ebruary26 , 19 91 . R osqu et e, Q ui no nes a nd L az ar o P i ri l R am os then m e tw i th V i c t orC os t a a nd on the a f t e r noon of

F e brua r y 26 the y w e nt t o B uz P ostC hevrol etatI- 20 and C oo per S tre eti n A rl i ng t on , T exas and t here R am os and Q ui no nes purchas ed a 198 7 T oyot a pi ckup truck usi ng $7 , 20 0 i n cas h t o p ay for the vehi cl e. T he truck w as t aken back to C o s ta ’s h o u s e w h e r e it w a s lo a d e d w ith ap p r o x im a te ly $ 3 5 0 ,0 0 0 in ca sh w hi ch had b ee n d er i ved b y C ost a f rom the sa l e of c on trol l ed s ubs t a nc e s f

ur ni s he d t o hi m on c ons i gnm e ntby Q ui none s . I n a s s i s t i ng Q ui none s i n hi s tr a ve l s t o T e xa s a nd i n obt a i ni ng a nd l oa di ng the T oy ot a truc k w i th drug pr oc e e ds , R O S Q U E T E he l pe d t o pr om ot e a nd carry o n th e i l l eg al act i v i t i es o f Q u i n o n es an d C o st a. A few d ays e a r l i e r , Q u i n o n e s a n d G u i l l e r mo Ca s a d o h a d d e l i v e r e d 1 0 k i l o g r a ms o f c o ca in e a n d o v er2 5 k il o g ra m s o f m ar ih u an a to C o sta a t C o sta’s re si dence. W hi l e R O S Q U E T E , R am os and Q ui no nes w er e i n the F ort W or th a r e a , C os t a di s tr i but e d a l l of the drugs e xc e ptf

or ap p r o x im a te ly 1 5 k ilo g r a m s o f m a r ih u a n a w h ic h r e m a in e d a t h is r e s i de nc e unt i l F e brua r y 28, 1991 w he n i tw a s s e i z e d by a ge nt s of the D ru g E n fo rcem en tA d m i n i strat i o n . O n F eb ru ary 2 7 , 1 9 9 1 , Q u i n o n es, R o s q u e te , a n d R a m o s le f t th e s ta te o f

T e x a s , e a c h u ltim a te ly g o in g to an o th er st at e o r co u n try. (e m ph as i s a dd ed). A s not ed abov e, the gu i del i nes def i ne a “ cont rol l ed subst ance offe nse” as

“ a n of f e ns e unde rf

e de r a l ors t a t e l a w . . . tha tpr ohi bi t s the . . . di s tr i but i on, or d is p e n s in g o f

a c o n tr o lle d s u b s ta n c e . . . w ith in te n t to . . . d is tr ib u te , o rd is p e n s e .” U .S .S .G . § 4 B 1 .2 ( b ) . I n a d d itio n , A p p lic a tio n N o te 1 e x p a n d s th is d e f in itio n to “in c lu d e th e o f

f e n s e s o f a id in g a n d a b e ttin g , c o n s p ir in g , a n d a tte m p tin g to c o m m it9

s u c h o f f e n s e s .” T h u s , g iv e n th e f a c ts to w h ic h R o s q u e te s tip u la te d , e s p e c ia lly h is kn ow l edge of and p art i ci pat i on i n fac i l i t at i ng the tra ff i cki ng of cont rol l ed su b st an ces, w e co n cl u d e th atR o sq u et e’ s T rav el A ctco n v i ct i o n w as fo r an o ffen se un der f eder al l aw thatproh i bi t s the ai di ng and abet t i ng of the di stri bu t i on of a cont rol l ed subst ance w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e, and t hati tw as there fore a “ cont rol l ed subst ance offe nse” un der § 4B 1. 2(b). T he di s tr i c tc our tthus c or r e c t l y appl i e d the “ c a r e e rof f e nde r ” e nha nc e m e nt i n U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 1(a) . T here fore w e nee d n otre ac h the go vernm ent ’ s other ar gu m ent s f

or af fi rm i ng R osqu et e’ s s ent ence . A FFI R M ED .