FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT D e c e m be r 15, 2005 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- 11772 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 0 0 3 6 8 - C R - T - 2 6 - T GW 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 O S E M A R I A S A N C H 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 M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( D e c e m be r15, 2005) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d D U B IN A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: A ppe l l a ntJ os e M a r i aS a nc he z appe a l s hi s 135- m onth s e nt e nc e f or2

pos s e s s i on w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f i ve ki l ogr a m s orm or e of c oc a i ne w hi l e on boa r d ave s s e l s ubj e c tt o the j ur i s di c t i on of the U ni t e d S t a t e s , i n vi ol a t i on of 46 A pp . U . S . C . § 1 90 3(a) and (g), 18 U . S . C . § 2 , and 2 1 U . S . C . § 9 60 (b)( 1)(B )( i i ), a nd c ons pi r a c y t o pos s e s s w i th i nt e ntt o di s tr i but e f i ve ki l ogr a m s orm or e of c o c a in e w h ile o n b o a r d av e s s e l s u b je c t to th e ju r is d ic tio n o f th e U n ite d S ta te s , in v io la tio n o f

4 6 A p p . U .S .C . § 1 9 0 3 ( a ) , ( g ) , a n d ( j) a n d 2 1 U .S .C . § 96 0(b)(1)(B)(i i ). S anchez argues tw o i ss ues on app ea l , nam el y, that(1) the di stri ct c our tc l e a r l y e rr e d i n de ny i ng S a nc he z am i ni m a l orm i norr ol e r e duc t i on, pur s ua nt t o U . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 2( b) ; a nd ( 2) the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s i m pos i t i on of as e nt e nc e of

135 m on ths w as un re as on abl e bec ause the di stri ctcourton l y c on si dere d o ne of the § 35 53 (a ) f ac t ors, ent i t l i ng S anchez t o re- se nt enci ng un der U ni ted Stat es v. B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U . S. __ , 1 2 5 S. Ct . 7 3 8 ( 2 0 0 5 ) . W e a f f i rm. I. S a n c h e z f

ir s t a r g u e s th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t e rr e d in d e n y in g h im am in o rr o le adj ustm entbecause i ti m prop er l y rul ed thatthe l ar ge am ou ntof cocai ne i nv ol ved in th e o f f e n s e p r e c lu d e d am in o rr o le a d ju s tm e n t. S a n c h e z c o n te n d s h e s h o u ld ha ve be e n gr a nt e d am i norr ol e a dj us tm e ntbe c aus e he w a s onl y ac r e w m e m be r , he ha d no ow ne r s hi p i nt e r e s ti n the c oc a i ne , he w a s pa i d l i tt l e c om pa r e d t o the co cai n e’ s v al u e, an d th ere w ere m o re p eo p l e i n v o l v ed i n th i s o ffen se th an th o seT h i s st an d ard o f rev i ew su rv i v es B oo ke r . See U n i ted S ta tes v. Cra w

f o rd , 407 1 F .3 d 1 1 7 4 , 1 1 7 8 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) ( “W e a g r e e w ith th e F if th C ir c u it th a t B oo ke rdo es n o t a lte ro u rr e v ie w o f

th e ap p lic a tio n o f

th e G u id e lin e s .” ) . 3 c au g h t o n th e b o a t. W e ha ve he l d tha tadi s tr i c tc our t ’ s de t e rm i na t i on of ade f e nda nt ’ s r ol e i n the offe nse i s afi nd i ng of fa ctt o b e r evi ew ed on l y f or cl ear e rr or. Un i te d

S ta te s v . De 1 V ar on , 17 5 F . 3d 93 0, 93 4 (11 th C i r. 19 99 ) ( e n banc ) . T h e Gu i d e l i n e s a l l o w a c our tt o de c r e a s e ade f

e nda nt ’ s of

f e ns e l e ve l byf

ourpoi nt s i f

the c our tf

i nds the de f e nda ntw a s am i ni m a l pa rt i c i pa ntorby tw o poi nt s i f the c our tf

i nds the d efen d an tw as a m i n o r p art i ci p an t . U . S . S . G . § 3 B 1 . 2 (a) an d (b ). A d efen d an ti s a m in im a l p a rtic ip a n t if

h e is “p la in ly a m o n g th e le a s t c u lp ab le o f th o s e in v o lv e d in the c onduc tof

agr oup. ” § 3B 1. 2, c om m e nt . ( n. 4) . A de f e nda nti s am i nor p a r tic ip a n t if

h e “is le s s c u lp ab le th a n m o s t o th e rp a r tic ip a n ts , b u t w h o s e r o le c o u ld no tbe desc ri bed as m i ni m al . ” § 3B 1. 2, com m ent . (n. 5). T he pa rty s e e ki ng the dow nw a r d a dj us tm e ntbe a r s the bur de n of e s t abl i s hi ng th e d e f e n d a n t’s r o le w a s m in o rb 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 . D e V

ar on , 1 7 5 F .3 d a t 9 3 9 . I n d e te rm in in g w h e th e ram itig a tin g r o le r e d u c tio n is w a rr a n te d , a di s tr i c tc ourte xa m i ne s : ( 1) the de f e nda nt ’ s r ol e a ga i ns tthe r e l e va ntc onduc tf or w hi c h he w a s he l d a c c ount abl e , a nd ( 2) the de f e nda nt ’ s r ol e i n c om pa r i s on t o the o th e rp a r tic ip a n ts . I

d. a t940. W he n the r e l e va ntc onduc ta ttr i but e d t o ade f e nda nt4

is id e n tic a l to h is a c tu a l c o n d u c t, h e c a n n o t p r o v e th a t h e is e n title d to am in o r - r o le adj ustm entsi m pl y by poi nt i ng t o som e broader c ri m i nal sc hem e f or w hi ch he w as n o t h e ld a c c o u n tab le . I d. a t 9 4 1 . W e c o n c lu d e th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s d e n ia l o f am in o rr o le a d

ju s tm e n t is s u p p o r te d b y th e r e c o r d u n d e rth e ap p lic ab le tw o - p r o n g e d a n a ly s is e s tab lis h e d in D e V ar on , 175 F . 3d 930. A c c or di ngl y , the di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rri n de t e rm i ni ng th a t S a n c h e z d id n o t q u a lif yf o ram in o rr o le r e d u c tio n .

II . S anchez a l so ar gu es thathi s s ent ence w as un re as on abl e bec ause the di stri ct courtdi d n otadequat el y c on si der, el aborat e on, or di sc uss a l l of the § 3 55 3(a) f a c t or s , a s r e qui r e d by the hol di ng i n B oo ke r , 5 4 3 U .S . __ , 1 2 5 S . C t. 7 3 8 . A cc ordi ng t o S anchez, the di stri ctcourton l y c on si dere d o ne fa ct or, se nt ence d isp ar ity, an d d idn o t co n sid ero th er§ 3 5 5 3 fa cto rs in d eter m in in g S an ch ez ’s s e n te n c e . U nd er B oo ke r , w e r e vi e w ade f e nda nt ’ s ul t i m a t e s e nt e nc e f or

“ un re as on abl enes s. ” 543 U . S . at___, 12 5 S . C t . at76 5. S peci fi ca l l y, the U ni t ed S t a t e s S upr e m e C ourtha s di r e c t e d s e nt e nc i ng c our t s t o c ons i de rthe f ol l ow i ng fa ct ors i n i m po si ng se nt ence s und erthe advi soryG ui del i nes’ s s chem e:

( 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 a nd the hi s t ory a nd char ac t er i st i cs of the defendant ; (2) the need for the se nt ence i m po se d5 – ( A ) t o r e f

l e c tthe s e r i ous ne s s of

the of f e ns e , t o pr om ot e r e s pe c tf or the l aw , and t o p rovi de j ustpu ni shm entfor the offens e; (B ) t o aff ord a d e q u a te d e te rr e n c e to c r im in a l c o n d u c t; ( C ) to p r o te c t th e p u b lic f r om f urthe rc r i m e s of

the de f e ndant ; a nd ( D ) t o pr ovi de the de f e nda nt w i th n ee ded edu ca t i on al or vo ca t i on al tra i ni ng , m edi ca l care , or other c orr e c t i ona l tr e a tm e nti n the m os te f f e c t i ve m a nne r ; ( 3) the ki nds of s e nt e nc e s a va i l abl e ; ( 4) the ki nds of s e nt e nc e a nd the s e nt e nc i ng r a nge es t abl i shed . . . [f

rom the G ui del i nes] ; and (5) any pert i nentpo l i cy st at em ent. . . ; (6) the need t o avo i d u nw arrant ed se nt ence di spar i t i es a m ong de f

e nda nt s w i th s i m i l a rr e c or ds w ho ha ve be e n f ound gui l ty of s i mi l a rc o n d u c t ; a n d ( 7 ) th e n e e d t o p r o v i d e r e s t i tu t i o n t o a n y v i c t i ms o f th e o f f e n s e . 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) ; B oo ke r , 125 S . C t . a t765- 66. W e c l ar i fi ed thatw e f

i rs teval uat e, usi ng pre- B oo ke rpr e c e de nt , w he the rthe di s tr i c tc ourtc orr e c t l y i nt e rpr e t e d a nd appl i e d the G ui de l i ne s t o de t e rm i ne the ap p r o p r ia te a d v is o ry G u id e lin e r a n g e . Cra w f o rd , 4 0 7 F . 3 d a t1 1 7 8 - 7 9 . As we not e d, “ the di s tr i c tc ourtr e m a i ns obl i ge d t o ‘ c ons ul t ’ a nd ‘ t a ke i nt o a c c ount ’ the G ui del i nes i n sent enci ng [the defendant ] , ” and the “ re as on abl enes s” st andard ap p lie s to th e u ltim a te s e n te n c e im p o s e d . I d. W e h a v e h e ld th a t, “n o th in g in B oo ke ror el se w here re qu i re s the di stri ctcourtt o st at e on the re cord thati thas e xpl i c i t l y c ons i de r e d e a c h of the § 3553( a ) f

a c t or s ort o di s c us s e a c h of the § 3 55 3(a) fa ct ors. ” U

n ite d S ta te s v . Sc o tt , N o. 05 -118 43 , ___ F . 3d ___ (11 th C i r. S e p t. 2 7 , 2 0 0 5 ) . T h e § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f a c to r s s e rv e a s g u id e s f

o rth e d is tr ic t a n d ap p e lla te c o u r ts in d e te rm in in g w h e th e ras e n te n c e is r e a s o n ab le . U ni ted Stat es v. W i ni nge ar , 4 2 2 F .3 d 1 2 4 1 , 1 2 4 6 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . H o w e v e r , w e h a v e d e c lin e d to6

ho l d sent ence s w i thi n the G ui del i ne ra ng e p er se r e a s o n ab le . I d. W e c on cl ud e thatS anchez’ s 135 -m on th sent ence i s r ea sonabl e. A s not ed ab o v e , S a n c h e z ’s s e n te n c e w a s w ith in th e G u id e lin e s r a n g e , o n e o f th e e x p lic it § 35 53 (a ) f ac t ors. 18 U . S . C . § 2 55 3(a) (4). F urther, the re cord show s the di stri ct c our tc ons ul t e d the G ui de l i ne s a nd m a de a n a c c ur a t e c om put a t i on of the G ui de l i ne s r a nge . T he di s tr i c tc our ta l s o c ons i de r e d the othe r§ 3553( a ) f a c t or s a nd nothi ng i n the r e c or d c onvi nc e s us tha tthe s e nt e nc e w a s unr e a s onabl e i n l i ghtof th e s e f a c to r s . B e c au s e we c o n c l u d e th a tS a n c h e z ’ s u l t i m a t e s e n t e n c e wa s r e a s o n ab l e , we a f f i rm. A FFI R M ED .