FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT NO VE MB ER 9 , 2005 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. 05- 10356 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 3 - 0 0 0 1 0 - C R - OR L - 2 2 - DA B 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 J U A N F E D E R I C O B A U T I S T 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

_________________________ ( N ove m b e r 9, 2005) B efo re D U B IN A , C A RN E S an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J ua n F e de r i c o B a ut i s t aappe a l s hi s s e nt e nc e of ni ne ty - s e ve n m onths2

im p r is o n m e n t f

o rc o n s p ir a c y to im p o r t e c s ta s y in v io la tio n o f 2 1 U .S .C . § 9 6 3 . W e a f f irm . O n O ct ob er21 , 20 04 , a j ury c on vi ct ed B aut i st a of c on spi ra cyt o i m po rt e c s t a s y . T he s c he m e i nvol ve d c our i e r s w ho tr a ns por t e d e c s t a s y f r om the D om i ni c a n R e publ i c , t o M i a m i , F l or i da , by c om m e r c i a l a i r l i ne . T he j ury m a de no f in d in g a s to th e n u m b e ro f e c s ta s y tab le ts f

o rw h ic h B a u tis taw a s r e s p o n s ib le . F ol l ow i ng the tri al , the U ni t ed S t at es P robat i on O ff i ce prepare d a pres e nt e nc e i nve s t i ga t i on r e por t . T he P S I de t e rm i ne d tha tthe s c he m e i nvol ve d f our c o u r ie r s w h o m a d e ato ta l o f f iv e tr ip s f

r o m th e D o m in ic a n R e p u b lic to M ia m i, e a c h c a rry i ng one s ui t c a s e . B e c a us e a uthor i t i e s i nt e r c e pt e d onl y one s ui t c a s e f r om o n e o f th e s e tr i p s , th e PSI e s t i ma t e d th e t o t a l a mo u n to f d ru g s i n v o l v e d . Th e PSI consi dere d thatthe i nt er ce pt ed sui t ca se cont ai ned 4 0, 00 0 p i l l s, and thatthe couri er w ho tra nspo rt ed i tw as pai d $ 4, 50 0, the sa m e a m ou ntas the other c ou ri er s. B as ed on thi s e vi de nc e , the P S I c onc l ude d tha te a c h s ui t c a s e c ont a i ne d 40, 000 t abl e t s a nd thatB aut i st a w as re spon si bl e f or conspi ri ng t o i m po rta t ot al of 20 0, 00 0 ecs t ac y tab le ts . T he P S I a ss i gn ed B aut i st a abase offe nse l evel of 36 pu rs uantt o U ni t ed S t a t e s S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s M a nua l § 2D 1. 1( c ) ( 2) ( 2004) , be c a us e 200, 000 ec st as y t abl et s w er e the equi val entof 25 , 00 0 k i l og ra m s of m ar i j uana. Itas si gn ed3

hi m a c ri m i nal hi st ory c at egory of I because he had no cr i m i nal re cord. B ef ore s e nt e nc i ng, B a ut i s t aobj e c t e d t o the P S I on the gr ounds tha tB l a ke l y v. W as hi ng t on , 54 2 U . S . 29 6, 12 4 S . C t . 25 31 (200 4), re nd er ed the G ui del i nes u n c o n s titu tio n a l. Ba u t i s t aw a s s e n t e n c e d o n J a n u a ry 1 3 , 2 0 0 5 , th e d a y a f t e rth e Su p r e me C our tde c i de d U ni t e d S t a t e s v. B ooke r , 543 U . S . __, 125 S . C t . 738 ( 2005) . A tthe hear i ng , the di stri ctcourtconsi dere d h ow t o sent ence B aut i st a i n l i gh tof B oo ker, g i v en th e factth atth e j u ry d i d n o tm ak e a fi n d i n g as t o th e am o u n to f ecst asy a ttr i but abl e t o B a ut i s t a . T he c our ti ni t i a l l y c ons i de r e d s e nt e nc i ng B a ut i s t at o the l ow e s tba s e of

f e ns e l e ve l f

orac r i m e i nvol vi ng e c s t a s y by a ttr i but i ng adrug q u an t i ty o f o n l y o n e ecst asy t ab l ett o h i m . T h e co u rtth en ex p l ai n ed th atb ecau se

“ the gui de l i ne s a r e no l onge rm a nda t ory , ” i tc oul d de t e rm i ne ahi ghe rdrug q u an t i ty. T h e co u rtfo u n d th atB au t i st a w as resp o n si b l e fo r 4 0 , 0 0 0 ecst asy t ab l et s, s ta tin g “[ t]h e r e ’s n o d o u b t th a t th e 4 0 ,0 0 0 p ills w e r e p r o v e n b e y o n dar e a s o n ab le doubt . ” B a ut i s t ar a i s e d aB ooke robj e c t i on t o the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s f i ndi ng r e ga r di ng th e d ru g q u a n tity . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t a s s ig n e d B a u tis taab a s e o f f e n s e le v e l o f

3 4 p u r s u a n t to U . S . S . G . § 2D 1. 1( c ) ( 3) be c a us e 40, 000 e c s t a s y t abl e t s w e r e the e qui va l e ntof 5, 000 ki l og ra m s of m ar i

j uana. T he courtdi d n otadj ustB aut i st a’ s off ense l evel . W i th an4

of f e ns e l e ve l of

34 a nd ac r i m i na l hi s t ory c a t e gory of I , the G ui de l i ne r a nge f or se nt enci ng B aut i st a w as 15 1 t o 1 88 m on ths. T he di stri ctcourtst at ed thatthi s w as a “ si gn i fi ca nt l y l on g sent ence for ano nv i ol entdrug offe nse. ” I tthere fore s e n te n c e d h im to o n ly n in e ty - s e v e n m o n th s im p r is o n m e n t. O n ap p e a l, B a u tis tam a k e s th r e e a r g u m e n ts . W e w ill c o n s id e rth e m o n e a t a tim e . I. B aut i st a f

i rs tar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourterre d w hen i tfoun d thathe w as r e s p o n s ib le f

o rim p o r tin g 4 0 ,0 0 0 e c s ta c y p ills . W e r e vi e w the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s f a c tua l de t e rm i na t i on of

the drug qua nt i ty f

or cl ea r e rr or. S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. R od ri gu ez , 39 8 F . 3d 12 91 , 12 96 (11th C i r. 20 05 ), cert . d en i ed , 1 2 5 S . C t . 2 9 3 5 (2 0 0 5 ). B ecau se B au t i st a h as o b j ect ed t o th e co u rt ’ s fa ctual fi nd i ng , the G ov ernm entbear s the bu rden of es t abl i shi ng the di sput ed fa ct b y ap r e p o n d e r a n c e o f

th e e v id e n c e . S e e id . W he r e the r e i s no drug s e i z ur e orthe a m ounts e i z e d doe s notr e f l e c tthe s c a le o f th e o f f e n s e , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t m u s t e s tim a te th e d ru g q u a n tity . U .S .S .G . § 2D 1. 1 c om m e nt( n. 12) . T he c our tm a y ba s e i t s c om put a t i on on e vi de nc e s how i ng the avera ge fr equency and am ou ntof the defendant ’ s drug sal es ov era gi ven pe r i od of t i m e . S e e R odr i gue z , 398 F . 3d a t1296. T he s e nt e nc e m a y be ba s e d on5

“f a ir , a c c u r a te , a n d c o n s e rv a tiv e e s tim a te s o f th e q u a n tity o f

d ru g s a ttr ib u tab le ” to th e d e f e n d a n t. I d . W h e n th e c a s e in v o lv e s ac o n s p ir a c y , th e c o u r t m a y c o n s id e ra ll r e a s onabl y f

or e s e e abl e a c t s a nd om i s s i ons of othe rpe r s ons i n f

ur the r a nc e of

the c r im in a l s c h e m e in c a lc u la tin g th e d e f e n d a n t’s b a s e o f

f e n s e le v e l. U .S .S .G . § 1 B 1 .3 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( B ) . T e s t i m ony a ttr i a l i ndi c a t e d tha tB aut i s t aw a s di r e c t l y i nvol ve d i n the r e c e i pt of four sui t ca se s thatw er e never i nt er ce pt ed. A dd i t i on al l y, t es t i m on y i nd i ca t ed th a t th e s c h e m e in v o lv e d af if th s u itc a s e th a t w a s f

o u n d to c o n ta in 4 0 ,0 0 0 tab le ts . T he couri erfr om thattri p t es t i fi ed thatshe c ou l d n otre m em ber w ho re ce i ved that s ui t c a s e . N otw i ths t a ndi ng tha t , B a ut i s t am a y be he l d r e s pons i bl e f orthe i nt e r c e pt e d s ui t c a s e a s a“ r e a s onabl y f or e s e e abl e a c t ” i n f

ur the r a nc e of

the conspi ra cy . U . S . S . G . § 1 B 1. 3(a) (1)( B ). A cc ordi ng l y, w e c on cl ud e thatthe di stri ct c o u r t d id n o t c o m m it c le a re rr o rw h e n it a ttr ib u te d 4 0 ,0 0 0 tab le ts to B a u tis ta . I I . B a ut i s t ane xta r gue s tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tc om m i tt e d c ons t i tut i ona l e rr or w h e n it d e te rm in e d th a t h e w a s r e s p o n s ib le f o rim p o r tin g 4 0 ,0 0 0 e c s ta c y tab le ts . B aut i st a a rgues thatthe di stri ctcourtm ade thi s f i nd i ng i n the abse nce of a j ury f i ndi ng, a n a dm i s s i on by hi m , orpr oof be y ond ar e a s onabl e doubtof the drug q u an t i ty.6

A s aprel i m i narym att er , w e not e thatB aut i st a has pres erved h i s B oo ker c l a i m f orappe l l a t e r e vi e w . S e e U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D ow l i ng, 403 F . 3d 1242, 1246 (11th C i r. 20 05 ), ce rt . deni ed, __ S . C t . __ (200 5). B ef ore s ent enci ng , he obj ec t ed t o the P S I on the grou nd s thatB l akel y r endered the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes u n co n stitu ti o n al. A t sen ten cin g , h e r aise d a B o o k ero b jectio n to th e d istrict co u rt’s f in d in g o f th e d ru g q u a n tity a ttr ib u tab le to h im . W e r e vi e w B a ut i s t a ’ s B ooke rc l a i m de novo a nd r e ve r s e onl y i f the e rr or w a s h a rm f

u l. S e e U n ite d S ta te s v . P a z , 4 0 5 F .3 d 9 4 6 , 9 4 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e st at ed i n R od ri gu ez thatconst i tut i on al B oo ker e rr or i s notthe appl i ca t i on of “ extra verdi ctenhancem ent s. ” R od ri gu ez , 39 8 F . 3d at13 00 –0 1. T he error occurs w hen th o se en h an cem en t s are ap p l i ed i n a m an d at o ry G u i d el i n es syst em . Id . ; see al so U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D unc a n, 400 F . 3d 1297, 1302 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( “ R odr i guez expl ai n[ed] ho w w e kno w thatthe sa m e e nh ance m ent s m ade i n a no n-m andat ory G ui de l i ne s s y s t e m a r e c ons t i tut i ona l l y pe rm i s s i bl e , a nd thus how w e know tha tthe e rr orw a s the f

a i l ur e t o tr e a tthe G ui de l i ne s a s a dvi s ory . ” ) , c e r t . de ni e d, __ S . C t . __ ( 2 0 0 5 ) . T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t c o m m it c o n s titu tio n a l B o o k e re rr o rw h e n it sen t en ced B au t i st a b ased o n a d ru g q u an t i ty n o tad m i tt ed b y h i m o r d eci d ed b y a j ury bey on d a re as on abl e dou bt . D uri ng the se nt enci ng hear i ng the courtexpl ai ned7

tha ti tc oul d a ttr i but e 40, 000 t abl e t s t o B a ut i s t ai ns t e a d of one e c s t a s y t abl e t( the l ow e s tqua nt i tyf

ora n of f e ns e i nvol vi ng e c s t a s y ) , be c a us e “ the gui de l i ne s a r e no l on ger m andat ory. ” T hi s s t at em ent , and the fa ctthatthe fi nal se nt ence w as l ow er than the G ui del i ne ra ng e, m ake i tcl ea r thatthe courttre at ed the G ui del i nes a s d is c r e tio n a ry . I I I . F i na l l y , B a ut i s t aa r gue s tha thi s s e nt e nc e w a s notr e a s onabl e ba s e d on the f a c to r s lis te d a t 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 . O nce the di stri ctcourtac cura t el y c al cul at es the G ui del i ne ra ng e, i tm ay i m po se a m ore s ever e or m ore l eni entse nt ence . S ee U ni t ed S t at es v. W i ni ng ea r, 42 2 F . 3d 12 41 , 12 44 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). F ol l ow i ng B oo ker, w e r evi ew the di stri ct c o u r t’s d e p a r tu r e f

r o m th e G u id e lin e r a n g e f o rr e a s o n ab le n e s s . I d . W e e v a lu a te w h e th e rth e s e n te n c e w a s r e a s o n ab le in lig h t o f th e f a c to r s lis te d in 1 8 U .S .C . § 3553( a ) . T he s e f

a c t or s i nc l ude : ( 1) the na tur e a nd c i r c um s t a nc e s of the of f e ns e ; ( 2) the hi st ory a nd char ac t er i st i cs of the defendant ; (3) the need for the se nt ence i m p o s e d t o r e f

l e c tth e s e r i o u s n e s s o f

th e o f f e n s e , t o p r o m o t e r e s p e c tf o rth e l a w, a nd t o pr ovi de j us tpuni s hm e nt ; ( 4) the ne e d t o pr ot e c tthe publ i c ; a nd ( 5) the G u id e lin e r a n g e . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) . A pp l yi ng the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors t o thi s c as e, w e c on si der thatB aut i st a w as8

in tim a te ly in v o lv e d in th e c o n s p ir a c y to im p o r t e c s ta s y . H e m e t c o u r ie r s s h o r tly before thei r departure t o the D om i ni ca n R epub l i c. H e w as pres entw hen they r e tu rn e d w ith th e irs u itc a s e s f ille d w ith e c s ta s y . I n s o m e c a s e s , h e e v e n d ir e c tly r e c e iv e d th e s u itc a s e s . W e a ls o c o n s id e rth a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t, in c a lc u la tin g h is G ui del i ne ra ng e, attri bu t ed 40 , 00 0 ecs t ac y pi l l s t o h i m . T hi s w as the am ou ntthat re sul t ed fr om on l y one couri ertri p t o the D om i ni ca n R epub l i c. F urtherm ore, a l though B a ut i s t aha d no c r i m i na l hi s t ory , w e c ons i de rtha thi s G ui de l i ne r a nge w a s 151 t o 188 m onths i m pr i s onm e nta nd the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s s e nt e nc e of 97 m o n th s w as 5 4 m o n th s b el o w th e l o w estp o i n to f h i s G u i d el i n e ran g e. F o r th ese r e a s o n s , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s s e n te n c e w a s m o r e th a n r e a s o n ab le . B a u tis tas h o u ld c o n s id e rh im s e lf

f o r tu n a te to h a v e r e c e iv e d th a t s e n te n c e . AF F I RME D.