F ILED U.S. COURT O F APP EALS EL EV EN TH C IRC UIT May 3 1, 2006 T HOMA S K. KA HN CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HEEL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

N o. 05- 1259 3 Non-A rgum ent Calendar

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- D. C. Docket N o. 04-00387 -CR- T- 24MSS UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,

ve rs us JOSE NIVER CANGA MINA, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- - Appeal f rom the United State s District Court for the Middle District of Florida

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -

(M ay 3 1, 200 6) Be fo re E D MO N D SO N , Ch ie f Judg e, T JO FL A T a nd D U BI N A , Ci rc uit Jud ge s. PE R CU RIA M:Mina also contends f or the fir st tim e on appe al that he wa s entitled to a minimal role reduc tion, 1 § 3B1.2( a). A s the district court did not err in r efusing Mina’s re quest for a minor role re duction, we r ejec t Mina’s arg ument about re ceiving no minimal role reduc tion. 2 Jose Niver C anga Mina appeals his 108 -m onth concurrent sentences im pose d a ft er

he ple d gu ilt y to co nspi ra cyto poss es s w ith int en t t o di stribu te f ive kilog ram s or m ore of coca ine while aboard a vessel subject to U nited States juri sd ic ti on , in vi ol at io n o f 46 U.S.C. App . § 1 90 3( a), (g ), (j), and 21 U.S.C. § 960( b) (1 )( B) (i i) , a nd p oss es sio n w ith int en t t o di stribu te f ive kil ogr am s or

m or e of cocaine w hile aboard a vessel subjec t to U. S. j urisdictio n, in violation of 46 U. S. C. § 190 3(a), (g), (j ), and 21 U. S. C. § 960 (b)(1)( B)(ii) . No re versible error has been s h o w n ; w e a f

f i r m. Mi nac ha lle nge s th e dis tr ic t c ourt’ s de nia l of his r eq ue st f

or amino r ro le re duc tio n, U . S. S. G . § 3B 1. 2( b) . H e co nte nds tha t he onl y w as ac re w m em be r on 1 a “ go- fa st” boa t c ar

ry ing 600 kil ogr am s of

c oc ai ne , tha t he ha d no ow ne rs hip interest in the drugs, that he was paid little com pared to the drug value, and that m or e p ers on s wer e in vo lv ed in th e d ru g s m ug gl in g v en tu re t ha n ju stth e b oa t cr ew. W e re vie w f

or c le ar e rr or the dis tric t c ourt’ s de te rm ina tio ns about

a de fe nda nt’ s r ole in an of

fe nse . S ee U nit edS ta te s v. Ry an , 289 F . 3d 1 339, 134 8 (1 1th Ci r. 200 2) . T he de fe nda nt b ears the bur de n of e stabli shi ng a

miti ga tin g r ole in th e o ffen se by a prep on de ran ce o f th e ev id en ce. Id .3

Se nte nc ing c ourts s houl d c onsi de r tw o princ ipl es w he n de te rm ini ng the defendant’ s role in the offense: “ first, the defendant’ s role in the relevant conduct for w hich [he] has been held accountable at sentencing, and, sec ond, [his] role as co m pare d to that of

oth er part ic ipa nts in [h is] r el ev an t c ondu ct . ” U nit edS ta te s v. De Varon, 175 F.3d 930, 940 (11th Cir. 1999) (en banc). T he dis tr ic t c ourt c ommitt edno c le ar e rr or in de te rm

ini ng tha t M ina ’ s r ole in the of fe nse w as m or e tha n mino r. Mi na ’ s se nte nc e w as ba se d on ly on the re le va nt c ondu ct

f or w hic h he w as he ld a cc ount ab le a t se nte nc ing : the 600 kil ogr am s of

c oc ai ne se iz edf

ro m the boa t. Mi naof

fe re d no e vid en ce tha t hi s participation as a crew m em ber w as minor com

pared to the other cre w mem bers on the boa t, apart

f ro m the c ap ta in, w hom

the dis tr ic t c ourt i ndi ca te d w oul d re ce ive ar ole e nha nc emen t. T he gov ernm en t’ s f ac t pr of fe r at the ple a co llo quy show edthat, a ft er

aCo as t G uardhe lic opt er a tte m pte d to c ont ac t the go- fa st b oa t, the boa t sp eda w ay , a nd the c re w m em be rs , inc lud ing Mi na , dum pe d 30 20- ki lo gr am ba le s o f co cai ne ov erb oa rd . A nd the dis tr ic t c ourt c orre ct ly poi nte d to the larg e drug q ua nti ty in de ny ing the mino r ro le r ed uc tio n. S ee D e V ar on, 175 F . 3d a t 94 3 ( am ount of drugs im porte d is “ m at eria l c onsi de ratio n” in as se ssi ng d ef en da nt’ s r ole in his r el ev an t co nduc t) . A lso , the dis tric t c ourt st at edtha t M ina w as be ing he ld a cc ount ab le onl y4

fo r the a m ount

of c oc ai ne on the go- fa st b oa t. T hus, Mi na ’ s arg um en t about a larg er c onsp ir ac y is not

pe rt ine nt t o w he the r he w as amino r part ic ipa nt i n th e ch ar ge d c onsp ir ac y . S ee D eV ar on, 175 F . 3d a t 94 4. W e se e no e rr or in the dis tr ic t c ourt’ s r ef

usa l t o appl y amino r ro le r ed uc tio n. AFFIR MED.